i’ve run across a couple sites that stopped updating a while ago, but have a good-sized archive. the videos are the size of their time - 320x240 - but at that size, they look sharp and clear with no issues at all. i’ve also seen some current sites with the same.
we’re not talking about 320x240 with a 1.5 Mbps bitrate here. many of these are from 350k to 600k and look good only because they’re small.
so the question here - if a site had hot models, was in a microniche you liked and the videos were very good quality at 320x240 but lose a fair amount of quality if you go full screen and a little if you go to 200%, could you enjoy the videos for a while or is that just too damned small in your opinion?
We have several older films like this. We never get complaints about the picture size. We do get complaints if the sound is poor (or, on some of our older films, missing). We do get people saying it would have been great to see the model do this, or why didn’t you show that. We still get compliments about older smaller sized films and some are among our current most viewed.
When we offer a choice of file sizes, the smaller of the two is nearly always more popular, prob because of download speeds.
With the older PHOTOS, we DO get complaints that they are smaller than the the newer ones.
So for our customers it doesn’t seem to be a major issue. As always there is a trade of with size and download time, and this seems to be part of the reason.
