Support NeoGAF

[Bartski]

While exporting a native quality animated gif from a 4K 60fps footage is relatively simple in Final Cut, it seems impossible to find an HD gif host that is free, easy to use, and allows uploading high-quality animated gifs, without completely destroying them.

When a new game reveals drops - that just begs for such material to be subtracted. And it gets subtracted and published and somehow everywhere you look - it's all total garbage 640x480s or grainy ass ultra compressed "HD" downgrades.

Just made one using the apparently (???) best one out there - gfycat. Source - 4K youtube. I used their internal editor, video downloaded with youtube-dl (100% native .webm)

To no surprise - It's absolute shit.





"HD" = It's heavily compressed with massive framerate drop, no way to count for me now but halved at best. What the hell man.

Am I doing this wrong? If you got any tips I'd love to see them. Doesn't seem to be the issue of a lack of a PRO account, at least no word on framerate or upload quality in the description aside from the casual "HD", well the above is "HD" apparently.

Is this perhaps a hole in the market? got some cash on the side and want to start an online business but lack ideas? You're welcome.

 

[KingHippo1967]

You realise how big a high-quality 4K 60fps GIF would be?

 

[Bartski]

You realise how big a high-quality 4K 60fps GIF would be?

as much as 4k/60 five seconds long video? The source .webm is 2.03 megs a second.

 

[KingHippo1967]

as much as 4k/60 five seconds long video? The source .webm is 2.03 megs a second.

A .webm isn't a GIF though, it's a movie file.

 

[eddie4]

Data costs monies, do you has monies?
Seriously, it would cost a lot to save the .gif's of everyone uploading. This is why most hosts compress the files. Saves space and bw.

You could just create a web server on your PC, create a webpage or cdn, and host them yourself. If you had decent bandwidth capabilities, which brings up other issues.

 

[Pagusas]

as much as 4k/60 five seconds long video? The source .webm is 2.03 megs a second.

a webm is not a gif.

 

[cormack12]

Really we need to move away from gif and start using one of the container formats. With Apple finally supporting webm after a decade we might get somewhere but then Edge is being a shit lord.

On places this like though no idea of xenforo supports webm, guessing not though. Best compromise I've found is to use mp4 and streamable. But the retention is shite for unpaid accounts.

 

[Bartski]

a webm is not a gif.

Of course it isnt and thats besides the point if the argument here was file size. But I get that, the size could be much larger at same frame by frame fidelity and I don’t really know the calculus.
Also my bad .gif as file format seems to support 50fps max. So how big is a 5 sec 1440p .gif x 50? I have no way to check right now. Is there also a limit to the resolution? I thought there is’t but now I’m not sure. I’m not talking about „best practices” resolution for web browsing but an actual limit of fidelity of the format. I’m not an expert in video file compression but I wouldn’t expect that size to be anything signifficant while we have 4k video streaming everywhere

 

[Bartski]

Really we need to move away from gif and start using one of the container formats. With Apple finally supporting webm after a decade we might get somewhere but then Edge is being a shit lord.

On places this like though no idea of xenforo supports webm, guessing not though. Best compromise I've found is to use mp4 and streamable. But the retention is shite for unpaid accounts.

yeah exactly, just streamable with short video clips looping. Maybe its just that the format itself is shit and very limited.

 

[Pagusas]

Of course it isnt and thats besides the point if the argument here was file size. But I get that, the size could be much larger at same frame by frame fidelity and I don’t really know the calculus.
Also my bad .gif as file format seems to support 50fps max. So how big is a 5 sec 1440p .gif x 50? I have no way to check right now. Is there also a limit to the resolution? I thought there is’t but now I’m not sure. I’m not talking about „best practices” resolution for web browsing but an actual limit of fidelity of the format. I’m not an expert in video file compression but I wouldn’t expect that size to be anything signifficant while we have 4k video streaming everywhere

Not just a resolution limit, but a color bit rate limit also, every frame of a gif is basically an uncompressed bitmap, usually limited to 256 colors and dithered to make more (you can get more + alpha via non-compliant methods) but at that size your talking 30-40mb for 5 seconds of high frame rate gif, that won’t be supported in all browsers. Gifs were never made to be used in that way.

 

[Bartski]

Not just a resolution limit, but a color bit rate limit also, every frame of a gif is basically an uncompressed bitmap, usually limited to 256 colors and dithered to make more (you can get more + alpha via non-compliant methods) but at that size your talking 30-40mb for 5 seconds of high frame rate gif, that won’t be supported in all browsers. Gifs were never made to be used in that way.

ok.. I didn't know that it's always bitmap 256 dithered and that's actually part of the format... it's starting to make sense now, so all together a 5 sec .gif embed is still around 10-15x the size and load on the browser than a 5 sec .webm or a different 4k embed stream, and in a much worse quality anyway due to format limits and browser compatibility. Oops.

So the initial idea in the OP makes no sense, this is just as far as you take it with .gif, only way is to replace it with something different and better.

 

[Pagusas]

ok.. I didn't know that it's always bitmap 256 dithered and that's actually part of the format... it's starting to make sense now, so all together a 5 sec .gif embed is still around 10-15x the size and load on the browser than a 5 sec .webm or a different 4k embed stream, and in a much worse quality anyway due to format limits and browser compatibility. Oops.

So the initial idea in the OP makes no sense, this is just as far as you take it with .gif, only way is to replace it with something different and better.

Correct, and the problem is every major browser was trying to make their own "next gif standard" for looping video, and we got some supporting .ogg, some supporting .webm, some supporting looping .mp4 using h.264. None could agree, and to this day we do not have a set standard replacement because of it.

 

[Bartski]

all clear now, thanks.