bearodactylyoutube compresses to 30fps
fair enough, i just heard that when you upload va the euro youtube it compresses 25.. iunno, got no source on that..
doesn't make the big difference Anyways :p
Upvote
Upvoted
2
Downvote
Downvoted
Questions for video editors
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
[quote=bearodactyl]youtube compresses to 30fps[/quote]
fair enough, i just heard that when you upload va the euro youtube it compresses 25.. iunno, got no source on that..
doesn't make the big difference Anyways :p
fair enough, i just heard that when you upload va the euro youtube it compresses 25.. iunno, got no source on that..
doesn't make the big difference Anyways :p
CzarOfTheSkyeProwerYou clearly have never heard of resampling.
yea you could do that, though i asume that he wants to record all of the clips at the same fps.
If you know you're gonna end up slowing down the clip and not using motion blur, then you can probably be fine with 120 FPS, but I record everything at 480 FPS just in case I change my mind.
[quote=CzarOfTheSkye][quote=Prower]You clearly have never heard of resampling.[/quote]
yea you could do that, though i asume that he wants to record all of the clips at the same fps.[/quote]
If you know you're gonna end up slowing down the clip and not using motion blur, then you can probably be fine with 120 FPS, but I record everything at 480 FPS just in case I change my mind.
yea you could do that, though i asume that he wants to record all of the clips at the same fps.[/quote]
If you know you're gonna end up slowing down the clip and not using motion blur, then you can probably be fine with 120 FPS, but I record everything at 480 FPS just in case I change my mind.
ProwerCzarOfTheSkyeProwerYou clearly have never heard of resampling.
yea you could do that, though i asume that he wants to record all of the clips at the same fps.
If you know you're gonna end up slowing down the clip and not using motion blur, then you can probably be fine with 120 FPS, but I record everything at 480 FPS just in case I change my mind.
well that's i can understand.
i am going by the mindset that he has everything layed out.
also, if you have the hard drive space for 420 fps files.. by all means record at that.
i just know that a lot of people aren't sitting around with 2 terabytes ssd's
like you can never argue against 420 > 120 fps..
I'm just saying if you aren't doing anything crazy, there is no reason to smash your hard drive with frame stacks :)
[quote=Prower][quote=CzarOfTheSkye][quote=Prower]You clearly have never heard of resampling.[/quote]
yea you could do that, though i asume that he wants to record all of the clips at the same fps.[/quote]
If you know you're gonna end up slowing down the clip and not using motion blur, then you can probably be fine with 120 FPS, but I record everything at 480 FPS just in case I change my mind.[/quote]
well that's i can understand.
i am going by the mindset that he has everything layed out.
also, if you have the hard drive space for 420 fps files.. by all means record at that.
i just know that a lot of people aren't sitting around with 2 terabytes ssd's
like you can never argue against 420 > 120 fps..
I'm just saying if you aren't doing anything crazy, there is no reason to smash your hard drive with frame stacks :)
yea you could do that, though i asume that he wants to record all of the clips at the same fps.[/quote]
If you know you're gonna end up slowing down the clip and not using motion blur, then you can probably be fine with 120 FPS, but I record everything at 480 FPS just in case I change my mind.[/quote]
well that's i can understand.
i am going by the mindset that he has everything layed out.
also, if you have the hard drive space for 420 fps files.. by all means record at that.
i just know that a lot of people aren't sitting around with 2 terabytes ssd's
like you can never argue against 420 > 120 fps..
I'm just saying if you aren't doing anything crazy, there is no reason to smash your hard drive with frame stacks :)
I have a 1 TB 7200 RPM drive I use for recording everything. If you don't have that or can't afford it, then I would suggest using SrcDemo2 to frameblend as you record. You can export at 30 FPS .png files. It doesn't look as good as Vegas frame blending, but it is a nice compromise for those who don't have the space to record high FPS .tga sequences.
You also get the same file size regardless of 120 FPS or 12000 FPS.
I have a 1 TB 7200 RPM drive I use for recording everything. If you don't have that or can't afford it, then I would suggest using SrcDemo2 to frameblend as you record. You can export at 30 FPS .png files. It doesn't look as good as Vegas frame blending, but it is a nice compromise for those who don't have the space to record high FPS .tga sequences.
You also get the same file size regardless of 120 FPS or 12000 FPS.
You also get the same file size regardless of 120 FPS or 12000 FPS.
ProwerI have a 1 TB 7200 RPM drive I use for recording everything. If you don't have that or can't afford it, then I would suggest using SrcDemo2 to frameblend as you record. You can export at 30 FPS .png files. It doesn't look as good as Vegas frame blending, but it is a nice compromise for those who don't have the space to record high FPS .tga sequences.
You also get the same file size regardless of 120 FPS or 12000 FPS.
haven't heard about that, sounds cool though..
gonna look it up some time soon.
thought i am a after effects man, and i have some plugins which blends quite good as well, but if it does it better, i thank you for the suggestion
[quote=Prower]I have a 1 TB 7200 RPM drive I use for recording everything. If you don't have that or can't afford it, then I would suggest using SrcDemo2 to frameblend as you record. You can export at 30 FPS .png files. It doesn't look as good as Vegas frame blending, but it is a nice compromise for those who don't have the space to record high FPS .tga sequences.
You also get the same file size regardless of 120 FPS or 12000 FPS.[/quote]
haven't heard about that, sounds cool though..
gonna look it up some time soon.
thought i am a after effects man, and i have some plugins which blends quite good as well, but if it does it better, i thank you for the suggestion
You also get the same file size regardless of 120 FPS or 12000 FPS.[/quote]
haven't heard about that, sounds cool though..
gonna look it up some time soon.
thought i am a after effects man, and i have some plugins which blends quite good as well, but if it does it better, i thank you for the suggestion
I don't like frame blending or motion blur. It makes tracking in mocha so much more difficult, and makes it pretty much impossible to 3D solve a scene
Also Czar, most frame blending plugins are to put intermediate frames for extreme slow motion. Twixtor is an example of this. Scrdemo2, on the other hand, compresses many frames into a singular frame. The result looks great while playing, but individual frames are blurry and scene analysis plugins struggle.
I don't like frame blending or motion blur. It makes tracking in mocha so much more difficult, and makes it pretty much impossible to 3D solve a scene
Also Czar, most frame blending plugins are to put intermediate frames for extreme slow motion. Twixtor is an example of this. Scrdemo2, on the other hand, compresses many frames into a singular frame. The result looks great while playing, but individual frames are blurry and scene analysis plugins struggle.
Also Czar, most frame blending plugins are to put intermediate frames for extreme slow motion. Twixtor is an example of this. Scrdemo2, on the other hand, compresses many frames into a singular frame. The result looks great while playing, but individual frames are blurry and scene analysis plugins struggle.
RawrSpoonI don't like frame blending or motion blur. It makes tracking in mocha so much more difficult, and makes it pretty much impossible to 3D solve a scene
Also Czar, most frame blending plugins are to put intermediate frames for extreme slow motion. Twixtor is an example of this. Scrdemo2, on the other hand, compresses many frames into a singular frame. The result looks great while playing, but individual frames are blurry and scene analysis plugins struggle.
This is why I stopped using SrcDemo2. I could get a better motion blur from Vegas, and I could toggle resample on or off. If I want to I can put my raw 480 FPS video in after effects, do all my motion graphics/tracking, then export it at 480 FPS and have Vegas frame blend the whole thing(or turn frame blending off depending on what I want).
[quote=RawrSpoon]I don't like frame blending or motion blur. It makes tracking in mocha so much more difficult, and makes it pretty much impossible to 3D solve a scene
Also Czar, most frame blending plugins are to put intermediate frames for extreme slow motion. Twixtor is an example of this. Scrdemo2, on the other hand, compresses many frames into a singular frame. The result looks great while playing, but individual frames are blurry and scene analysis plugins struggle.[/quote]
This is why I stopped using SrcDemo2. I could get a better motion blur from Vegas, and I could toggle resample on or off. If I want to I can put my raw 480 FPS video in after effects, do all my motion graphics/tracking, then export it at 480 FPS and have Vegas frame blend the whole thing(or turn frame blending off depending on what I want).
Also Czar, most frame blending plugins are to put intermediate frames for extreme slow motion. Twixtor is an example of this. Scrdemo2, on the other hand, compresses many frames into a singular frame. The result looks great while playing, but individual frames are blurry and scene analysis plugins struggle.[/quote]
This is why I stopped using SrcDemo2. I could get a better motion blur from Vegas, and I could toggle resample on or off. If I want to I can put my raw 480 FPS video in after effects, do all my motion graphics/tracking, then export it at 480 FPS and have Vegas frame blend the whole thing(or turn frame blending off depending on what I want).
dellortThe misinformation in this thread is amazing.
it really is, im up to about 7 facepalms now.
[quote=dellort]The misinformation in this thread is amazing.[/quote]
it really is, im up to about 7 facepalms now.
it really is, im up to about 7 facepalms now.
dellortThe misinformation in this thread is amazing.
idk, I'm just speaking from my experiences with srcdemo2. Generally if I want to 3D solve a scene in AE, I have to turn motion blur off and use identity frames on srcdemo2. Otherwise it becomes a tedious task of removing 2D points throughout the entire scene and even then it isn't guaranteed to solve the camera.
Same with tracking in mocha. Motion blur and frame blending tend to make it struggle when tracking something and I have to spend lots of time readjusting and manually tracking for it to work to a level I'm happy with. It isn't a big deal with smooths, but with POV it's tedious.
[quote=dellort]The misinformation in this thread is amazing.[/quote]
idk, I'm just speaking from my experiences with srcdemo2. Generally if I want to 3D solve a scene in AE, I have to turn motion blur off and use identity frames on srcdemo2. Otherwise it becomes a tedious task of removing 2D points throughout the entire scene and even then it isn't guaranteed to solve the camera.
Same with tracking in mocha. Motion blur and frame blending tend to make it struggle when tracking something and I have to spend lots of time readjusting and manually tracking for it to work to a level I'm happy with. It isn't a big deal with smooths, but with POV it's tedious.
idk, I'm just speaking from my experiences with srcdemo2. Generally if I want to 3D solve a scene in AE, I have to turn motion blur off and use identity frames on srcdemo2. Otherwise it becomes a tedious task of removing 2D points throughout the entire scene and even then it isn't guaranteed to solve the camera.
Same with tracking in mocha. Motion blur and frame blending tend to make it struggle when tracking something and I have to spend lots of time readjusting and manually tracking for it to work to a level I'm happy with. It isn't a big deal with smooths, but with POV it's tedious.
RawrSpoondellortThe misinformation in this thread is amazing.
idk, I'm just speaking from my experiences with srcdemo2. Generally if I want to 3D solve a scene in AE, I have to turn motion blur off and use identity frames on srcdemo2. Otherwise it becomes a tedious task of removing 2D points throughout the entire scene and even then it isn't guaranteed to solve the camera.
Same with tracking in mocha. Motion blur and frame blending tend to make it struggle when tracking something and I have to spend lots of time readjusting and manually tracking for it to work to a level I'm happy with. It isn't a big deal with smooths, but with POV it's tedious.
i tend to track in nuke.
haven't ever used a better tracker than the one in nuke
[quote=RawrSpoon][quote=dellort]The misinformation in this thread is amazing.[/quote]
idk, I'm just speaking from my experiences with srcdemo2. Generally if I want to 3D solve a scene in AE, I have to turn motion blur off and use identity frames on srcdemo2. Otherwise it becomes a tedious task of removing 2D points throughout the entire scene and even then it isn't guaranteed to solve the camera.
Same with tracking in mocha. Motion blur and frame blending tend to make it struggle when tracking something and I have to spend lots of time readjusting and manually tracking for it to work to a level I'm happy with. It isn't a big deal with smooths, but with POV it's tedious.[/quote]
i tend to track in nuke.
haven't ever used a better tracker than the one in nuke
idk, I'm just speaking from my experiences with srcdemo2. Generally if I want to 3D solve a scene in AE, I have to turn motion blur off and use identity frames on srcdemo2. Otherwise it becomes a tedious task of removing 2D points throughout the entire scene and even then it isn't guaranteed to solve the camera.
Same with tracking in mocha. Motion blur and frame blending tend to make it struggle when tracking something and I have to spend lots of time readjusting and manually tracking for it to work to a level I'm happy with. It isn't a big deal with smooths, but with POV it's tedious.[/quote]
i tend to track in nuke.
haven't ever used a better tracker than the one in nuke
CzarOfTheSkyebearodactylyoutube compresses to 30fpsfair enough, i just heard that when you upload va the euro youtube it compresses 25.. iunno, got no source on that..
doesn't make the big difference Anyways :p
No, if you upload a 60fps video it will make it 30, because that's half. If you upload 50 it will go to 25.
I don't recommend it though, sound can go out of sync and stuff. It's better to prepare your video for YouTube and render to 30 or lower.
[quote=CzarOfTheSkye][quote=bearodactyl]youtube compresses to 30fps[/quote]
fair enough, i just heard that when you upload va the euro youtube it compresses 25.. iunno, got no source on that..
doesn't make the big difference Anyways :p[/quote]
No, if you upload a 60fps video it will make it 30, because that's half. If you upload 50 it will go to 25.
I don't recommend it though, sound can go out of sync and stuff. It's better to prepare your video for YouTube and render to 30 or lower.
fair enough, i just heard that when you upload va the euro youtube it compresses 25.. iunno, got no source on that..
doesn't make the big difference Anyways :p[/quote]
No, if you upload a 60fps video it will make it 30, because that's half. If you upload 50 it will go to 25.
I don't recommend it though, sound can go out of sync and stuff. It's better to prepare your video for YouTube and render to 30 or lower.
CzarOfTheSkyethe301stspartanCzarOfTheSkyei actually work with video production.
the usual workflow for "montage" jobs usually goes a little like this:
1)find your song
2)lisint to this song until you hate it(so you know how the flow of it goes ect)
3)get all your clips compressed, and ready to import (no reason to break your editing workflow wit stupid things like compressing)
4)edit your stuff
5)send it to other people that has no clue of editing what so ever(as that is the closest to the actual consumer(you can always get a "prof" opinion on it after))
6) color grading
7) fix the music and sound effects levels
8) render
9) feel gooooooooood
also, record at max 120 fps(there is no reason to rape your hard drive with high fps files.. as you LITERALLY wont see a difference unless you slow down to around... 1-2 %
Lol, where do you work, where people think 2 fps are acceptable?
never said that, i said that you wont need more than 120 FPs unless you are slowing down to 1-2%
the standard fps for european video productions is 25 fps(the NA is 30)
so if you wanna slow down 50%
you still have over double of the frame rate that is going to be showed,
it should run smooth as hell at around 25%
thought that is pretty much the lowest you can go without dropping frames.
and i figured that i haven't seen anyone use anything that slow.
even thought you render an amazing video with a high fps, YouTube is still going to use their own compression codec wich runs at 25 fps, so the rest of the frames litterally goes to waste.
also, i dont know why you care, but i work at something called:
Mayday film.
i am currently an intern..
and i have been going to school with video editing for 3 years now.
But you said that it's ok unless you are at 1-2%. Which means that 3% are ok. Which is 2 fps.
[quote=CzarOfTheSkye][quote=the301stspartan][quote=CzarOfTheSkye]i actually work with video production.
the usual workflow for "montage" jobs usually goes a little like this:
1)find your song
2)lisint to this song until you hate it(so you know how the flow of it goes ect)
3)get all your clips compressed, and ready to import (no reason to break your editing workflow wit stupid things like compressing)
4)edit your stuff
5)send it to other people that has no clue of editing what so ever(as that is the closest to the actual consumer(you can always get a "prof" opinion on it after))
6) color grading
7) fix the music and sound effects levels
8) render
9) feel gooooooooood
also, record at max 120 fps(there is no reason to rape your hard drive with high fps files.. as you LITERALLY wont see a difference unless you slow down to around... 1-2 %[/quote]
Lol, where do you work, where people think 2 fps are acceptable?[/quote]
never said that, i said that you wont need more than 120 FPs unless you are slowing down to 1-2%
the standard fps for european video productions is 25 fps(the NA is 30)
so if you wanna slow down 50%
you still have over double of the frame rate that is going to be showed,
it should run smooth as hell at around 25%
thought that is pretty much the lowest you can go without dropping frames.
and i figured that i haven't seen anyone use anything that slow.
even thought you render an amazing video with a high fps, YouTube is still going to use their own compression codec wich runs at 25 fps, so the rest of the frames litterally goes to waste.
also, i dont know why you care, but i work at something called:
Mayday film.
i am currently an intern..
and i have been going to school with video editing for 3 years now.[/quote]
But you said that it's ok unless you are at 1-2%. Which means that 3% are ok. Which is 2 fps.
the usual workflow for "montage" jobs usually goes a little like this:
1)find your song
2)lisint to this song until you hate it(so you know how the flow of it goes ect)
3)get all your clips compressed, and ready to import (no reason to break your editing workflow wit stupid things like compressing)
4)edit your stuff
5)send it to other people that has no clue of editing what so ever(as that is the closest to the actual consumer(you can always get a "prof" opinion on it after))
6) color grading
7) fix the music and sound effects levels
8) render
9) feel gooooooooood
also, record at max 120 fps(there is no reason to rape your hard drive with high fps files.. as you LITERALLY wont see a difference unless you slow down to around... 1-2 %[/quote]
Lol, where do you work, where people think 2 fps are acceptable?[/quote]
never said that, i said that you wont need more than 120 FPs unless you are slowing down to 1-2%
the standard fps for european video productions is 25 fps(the NA is 30)
so if you wanna slow down 50%
you still have over double of the frame rate that is going to be showed,
it should run smooth as hell at around 25%
thought that is pretty much the lowest you can go without dropping frames.
and i figured that i haven't seen anyone use anything that slow.
even thought you render an amazing video with a high fps, YouTube is still going to use their own compression codec wich runs at 25 fps, so the rest of the frames litterally goes to waste.
also, i dont know why you care, but i work at something called:
Mayday film.
i am currently an intern..
and i have been going to school with video editing for 3 years now.[/quote]
But you said that it's ok unless you are at 1-2%. Which means that 3% are ok. Which is 2 fps.
LuckyLukeCzarOfTheSkyeNo, if you upload a 60fps video it will make it 30, because that's half. If you upload 50 it will go to 25.bearodactylyoutube compresses to 30fpsfair enough, i just heard that when you upload va the euro youtube it compresses 25.. iunno, got no source on that..
doesn't make the big difference Anyways :p
I don't recommend it though, sound can go out of sync and stuff. It's better to prepare your video for YouTube and render to 30 or lower.
yeah, i render at 25 fps. (gonna render at 30 fps from now on, now that i know it dosen't compress 25)
[quote=LuckyLuke][quote=CzarOfTheSkye][quote=bearodactyl]youtube compresses to 30fps[/quote]
fair enough, i just heard that when you upload va the euro youtube it compresses 25.. iunno, got no source on that..
doesn't make the big difference Anyways :p[/quote]
No, if you upload a 60fps video it will make it 30, because that's half. If you upload 50 it will go to 25.
I don't recommend it though, sound can go out of sync and stuff. It's better to prepare your video for YouTube and render to 30 or lower.[/quote]
yeah, i render at 25 fps. (gonna render at 30 fps from now on, now that i know it dosen't compress 25)
fair enough, i just heard that when you upload va the euro youtube it compresses 25.. iunno, got no source on that..
doesn't make the big difference Anyways :p[/quote]
No, if you upload a 60fps video it will make it 30, because that's half. If you upload 50 it will go to 25.
I don't recommend it though, sound can go out of sync and stuff. It's better to prepare your video for YouTube and render to 30 or lower.[/quote]
yeah, i render at 25 fps. (gonna render at 30 fps from now on, now that i know it dosen't compress 25)
the301stspartanCzarOfTheSkyethe301stspartanCzarOfTheSkyei actually work with video production.
the usual workflow for "montage" jobs usually goes a little like this:
1)find your song
2)lisint to this song until you hate it(so you know how the flow of it goes ect)
3)get all your clips compressed, and ready to import (no reason to break your editing workflow wit stupid things like compressing)
4)edit your stuff
5)send it to other people that has no clue of editing what so ever(as that is the closest to the actual consumer(you can always get a "prof" opinion on it after))
6) color grading
7) fix the music and sound effects levels
8) render
9) feel gooooooooood
also, record at max 120 fps(there is no reason to rape your hard drive with high fps files.. as you LITERALLY wont see a difference unless you slow down to around... 1-2 %
Lol, where do you work, where people think 2 fps are acceptable?
never said that, i said that you wont need more than 120 FPs unless you are slowing down to 1-2%
the standard fps for european video productions is 25 fps(the NA is 30)
so if you wanna slow down 50%
you still have over double of the frame rate that is going to be showed,
it should run smooth as hell at around 25%
thought that is pretty much the lowest you can go without dropping frames.
and i figured that i haven't seen anyone use anything that slow.
even thought you render an amazing video with a high fps, YouTube is still going to use their own compression codec wich runs at 25 fps, so the rest of the frames litterally goes to waste.
also, i dont know why you care, but i work at something called:
Mayday film.
i am currently an intern..
and i have been going to school with video editing for 3 years now.
But you said that it's ok unless you are at 1-2%. Which means that 3% are ok. Which is 2 fps.
now we're just pointing out stuff, just to be a bitch.. it's just a figure of speech..
i even stated that the lowest you should go is 25%, so there i already set the bar, therefor not needing to state that i do not only mean 1-2% but actually 1-24% ish percent..
but i don't feel like discussing literally worthless shit, so let's end this now? :)
[quote=the301stspartan][quote=CzarOfTheSkye][quote=the301stspartan][quote=CzarOfTheSkye]i actually work with video production.
the usual workflow for "montage" jobs usually goes a little like this:
1)find your song
2)lisint to this song until you hate it(so you know how the flow of it goes ect)
3)get all your clips compressed, and ready to import (no reason to break your editing workflow wit stupid things like compressing)
4)edit your stuff
5)send it to other people that has no clue of editing what so ever(as that is the closest to the actual consumer(you can always get a "prof" opinion on it after))
6) color grading
7) fix the music and sound effects levels
8) render
9) feel gooooooooood
also, record at max 120 fps(there is no reason to rape your hard drive with high fps files.. as you LITERALLY wont see a difference unless you slow down to around... 1-2 %[/quote]
Lol, where do you work, where people think 2 fps are acceptable?[/quote]
never said that, i said that you wont need more than 120 FPs unless you are slowing down to 1-2%
the standard fps for european video productions is 25 fps(the NA is 30)
so if you wanna slow down 50%
you still have over double of the frame rate that is going to be showed,
it should run smooth as hell at around 25%
thought that is pretty much the lowest you can go without dropping frames.
and i figured that i haven't seen anyone use anything that slow.
even thought you render an amazing video with a high fps, YouTube is still going to use their own compression codec wich runs at 25 fps, so the rest of the frames litterally goes to waste.
also, i dont know why you care, but i work at something called:
Mayday film.
i am currently an intern..
and i have been going to school with video editing for 3 years now.[/quote]
But you said that it's ok unless you are at 1-2%. Which means that 3% are ok. Which is 2 fps.[/quote]
now we're just pointing out stuff, just to be a bitch.. it's just a figure of speech..
i even stated that the lowest you should go is 25%, so there i already set the bar, therefor not needing to state that i do not only mean 1-2% but actually 1-24% ish percent..
but i don't feel like discussing literally worthless shit, so let's end this now? :)
the usual workflow for "montage" jobs usually goes a little like this:
1)find your song
2)lisint to this song until you hate it(so you know how the flow of it goes ect)
3)get all your clips compressed, and ready to import (no reason to break your editing workflow wit stupid things like compressing)
4)edit your stuff
5)send it to other people that has no clue of editing what so ever(as that is the closest to the actual consumer(you can always get a "prof" opinion on it after))
6) color grading
7) fix the music and sound effects levels
8) render
9) feel gooooooooood
also, record at max 120 fps(there is no reason to rape your hard drive with high fps files.. as you LITERALLY wont see a difference unless you slow down to around... 1-2 %[/quote]
Lol, where do you work, where people think 2 fps are acceptable?[/quote]
never said that, i said that you wont need more than 120 FPs unless you are slowing down to 1-2%
the standard fps for european video productions is 25 fps(the NA is 30)
so if you wanna slow down 50%
you still have over double of the frame rate that is going to be showed,
it should run smooth as hell at around 25%
thought that is pretty much the lowest you can go without dropping frames.
and i figured that i haven't seen anyone use anything that slow.
even thought you render an amazing video with a high fps, YouTube is still going to use their own compression codec wich runs at 25 fps, so the rest of the frames litterally goes to waste.
also, i dont know why you care, but i work at something called:
Mayday film.
i am currently an intern..
and i have been going to school with video editing for 3 years now.[/quote]
But you said that it's ok unless you are at 1-2%. Which means that 3% are ok. Which is 2 fps.[/quote]
now we're just pointing out stuff, just to be a bitch.. it's just a figure of speech..
i even stated that the lowest you should go is 25%, so there i already set the bar, therefor not needing to state that i do not only mean 1-2% but actually 1-24% ish percent..
but i don't feel like discussing literally worthless shit, so let's end this now? :)
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.