HIP-8 [Phase-3]: Accept 352 as minimum dimension in video submissions

This is an extra-official debate, not considered in the current protocol but I agreed to give an extra day for the minority to express their opinions. Tomorrow at 3:00 PM (GMT -3) I will resubmit the proposal with the appropriate modifications.

Simple summary
Make clear that the definition of 360p does not literally mean 360 pixels, and that certain codecs crop 4 pixel columns from each side of the image. Submissions with 352 pixels wide should not be considered in violation with submission rules.

Abstract
This amendment proposal is a fast, immediate solution to issues related to a widespread method of video submission… It moves the minimum dimension of the width or height of videos from 360 to 352 to match what is currently capable in the most widespread technology available. The 8 pixels removed cropped by the codec due to ancient PAL analogue norm is not moving the line too much and it fits the technical capability of current widespread technology. It is not realistic to challenge a person because 8 pixel columns are removed from the side of the picture (in the case that is background that is removed from the frame and not actual image). This amendment is final and it is not intended to serve precedent of moving the minimum any further than this.

Motivation
The most common and easy way for a lay user to submit and transfer a video without additional installations or knowledge is sending it via WhatsApp and downloading it through WhatsApp web. In order to avoid opportunistic challengers that predate in these submissions, that would otherwise be a good-faith submission, an urgent amendment to this policy should be put in place. It would also lift some artificial and clunky methods that current new users are using that degrades the platform in order to meet the requirements (re-encoding video, padding to sides of it, etc.).

Specification
Minimum video dimensions is a square of 352 pixels by 352 pixels. Videos with equal or higher size than stated should not be considered a violation to the rule #4 of submission guidelines, since it is still considered de facto 360p. Videos equaling 351 pixels or lower in size in any of their dimensions will violate rule #4.

This is an interim resolution until more precise video quality submission guidelines are approved.

Implementation
Submission rule #4 should change the requirements as specified above and become effective immediately.

Rationale
Refer to Imprecise rule regarding video quality of submissions

2 Likes

The original proposal mentioned accepting 352 as the width of vertical videos. The proposal here says a square video of 352x352 would be fine. I do not agree with that.

In my opinion, the specifications should not mention 360p at all, only minimum height and width, for the sake of clarity.

Here’s how I’d like it to be written: HIP-8 [Phase-2]: Accept 352 as width in vertical video submissions - #5 by 0x6687c671980e65ebd722b9146fc61e2471558dd6_Ethereum

Can we get it rewritten before voting?

3 Likes

Since there is already a snapshot vote up, I’ll be voting no so as to have a proper discussion first and form consensus on how we are going to implement this.
I agree with @0x6687c671980e65ebd722b9146fc61e2471558dd6_Ethereum that the specification lacks clarity and should be more refined.

1 Like

Would you aggree to change this to:

Specification
Videos with equal or higher pixel size than stated in the implementation section should not be considered a violation to the rule #4 of submission guidelines. Videos equaling 351 pixels or lower in size in any of their dimensions will violate rule #4.

This is an interim resolution until more precise video quality submission guidelines are approved.

Implementation
Change rule number #4, replacing

The video quality should be at least 360p, at most 2 minutes long, and in the
video/webm, video/MP4, video/avi or video/mov format

With

Video resolution must follow the minimum size:

Horizontal video
Minimum height in pixels: equal to or higher than 352 pixels
Minimum width in pixels: equal to or higher than 352 pixels

Vertical video
Minimum height in pixels: equal to or higher than 352 pixels
Minimum width in pixels: equal to or higher than 352 pixels
2 Likes

Do you want to remove the requirements of 2min long and formats too?. Because in the new section of the policy is not specified.

Read HIP-8 [Phase-3]: Accept 352 as minimum dimension in video submissions - #4 by ludovico .

It specifies what text should be replaced with what.

That’s what I have read.

I disagree, the duration and formats of the video should remain limited in the policy. They are there for a reason.

1 Like

Agreed, you’re right.

New version would be:

Video resolution must be at most 2 minutes long, in the video/webm, video/MP4, video/avi or video/mov format, and follow the minimum size:

Horizontal video
Minimum height in pixels: equal to or higher than 352 pixels
Minimum width in pixels: equal to or higher than 352 pixels

Vertical video
Minimum height in pixels: equal to or higher than 352 pixels
Minimum width in pixels: equal to or higher than 352 pixels

I would eliminate the horizontal vs vertical division, as we would be accepting also square videos, which are not either.

I would rephrase as “Videos can be vertical (portrait), horizontal (landscape) or square, with both width and height bigger than or equal to 352 pixels”.

Please have in mind that:

  • A square 352px video has 123.904 pixels
  • A 480x360 video (“360p”) has 172.800 pixels
  • A 640x360 video (“Wide 360p”) has 230.400 pixels

Clarifying that a vertical 352x640 video should be accepted because “360p” is not a clear enough measurement for vertical videos should not open an opportunity for videos with lesser resolutions. In this case, almost 50% less if you compare it to “Wide 360p”.

IMHO, the Phase 2 proposal was about “accepting 352 as width in vertical video submissions”, as the title says: “HIP-8 [Phase-2]: Accept 352 as width in vertical video submissions”.

@0xa819a599f42f50977c8d38c66a382b52d8d2f8a2_Ethereum and @0x6687c671980e65ebd722b9146fc61e2471558dd6_Ethereum have different opinions. Would you be able to do a compromise between these two?

Amount of pixels is irrelevant at this stage since the actual usable and challengeable portion of the frame is highly variable (for reasons stated in Imprecise rule regarding video quality of submissions).

Also, locking width and height within an aspect ratio would generate more space for opportunistic challenge, not less.

I would favor @0xa819a599f42f50977c8d38c66a382b52d8d2f8a2_Ethereum solution, but I’d like to hear from you. The specification of each case was a request from @0x6687c671980e65ebd722b9146fc61e2471558dd6_Ethereum to make it easier for jurors to refer to in its entirety.

1 Like

I agree that 352x352 has very few pixels, but is up to the submitter getting the most of them and making a good video.

The case that originated this “passing video throug whatsapp” will never make a 352x352.

I think we should move forward making clear that we need better definitions, or even better, a frontend tool that eliminate this challenging point.

I would not lock aspect ratio, that is a rabbit hole.

2 Likes

EDIT: updated with suggestion by @martijn

Agree with @dario that the unit should be in the title.

Thank you all for your feedback. The main argument used by challengers has been identical and referred to “less than 360p in one of its dimensions” so 352 pixels in any dimension as a minimum is the way to go. Although I’m against to be redundant in the part of text that refers to width and height, it is good so that there is the least wiggle room for opportunism.

I hope to work together with you in the delineation of better video submission guidelines in the future.

So if there is no further comments the final proposal version would change the following:

Title
From
Accept 352 as minimum dimension in video submissions
To
Accept 352 pixels minimum dimension in video submissions

Implementation section
Implementation
Change the text of rule number #4, replacing this block of text:

The video quality should be at least 360p, at most 2 minutes long, and in the
video/webm, video/MP4, video/avi or video/mov format

With this block of text:

Video submissions must follow all of the following requirements:

  • at most 2 minutes long,
  • in the video/webm, video/MP4, video/avi or video/mov format,
  • vertical (portrait), horizontal (landscape) or square,

and follow the minimum size:

  • Minimum height: equal to or higher than 352 pixels
  • Minimum width: equal to or higher than 352 pixels
1 Like

I would suggest to skip the aspect ratio specification (portrait/landscape/sq) cause it does not add anything useful to the requirements, instead just specify the minimum pixel size in any dimension to make it as concise and brief as possible.

Unfortunately, we’ve learnt that conciseness is friend of speculation.

User @martijn from the Telegram group added a suggestion to change
“Video submissions must be:”
to
“Video submissions must follow all of the following requirements:”

Which I agree.

`

Amount of pixels is irrelevant at this stage since the actual usable and challengeable portion of the frame is highly variable (for reasons stated in Imprecise rule regarding video quality of submissions).

`

I don’t think the amount of pixels is irrelevant at this stage, actually I think it’s the opposite. It paves the way to rule out videos with black bars or unusable sections (which I think is a no-brainer - easy to understand, easy to check, easy to judge), and then sets the stage where we can down the line set some rule like: “the human (or human face) must cover at least 50% of the video for at least 3 seconds, or something along these lines.”

So I would vote yes for something like:

Video resolution must be at most 2 minutes long, in the video/webm, video/MP4, video/avi or video/mov format, and follow the minimum size:

Horizontal video
Minimum height in pixels: equal to or higher than 360 pixels
Minimum width in pixels: equal to or higher than 640 pixels

Vertical video
Minimum height in pixels: equal to or higher than 640 pixels
Minimum width in pixels: equal to or higher than 352 pixels

Regarding locking the aspect ratio, I’d agree it might generate some opportunities for challenges. However notice that once we set a clear minimum resolution, the dev team can easily code the submit page to reject videos that do not comply with it. Once we have that, we won’t have this problem.

Hope to hear more opinions on this!

I would be hapy to support an updating of this guideline.
But drafts cited are still not solving the issues mentioned here: Imprecise rule regarding video quality of submissions

i.e:

  • Users adding black padding
  • face v. background ratio

I agree this is incomplete, but it is an emergency and interim measure that certainly do not cover all the issues. That will require more time to discuss. There are currently several profiles being challenged because of the flawed 360p rule, and the full update on the guidelines is going to take probably months to discuss.

So the objective of this HIP-8 is to replace an imprecise policy with another imprecise policy.

I don´t believe this is the correct solution.

The way should be to explain to the jurors the spirit of this guideline and if it is relevant or not the 8 pixels that are missing (which I agree is ridiculous).

A good defense in the challenged cases should suffice.

1 Like

Thank you for your feedback and comments. I wish we had more time than the time we had in Phase 2 which was the moment to discuss all of this but debate must reach an end at some point, especially given that it is an urgent situation. Signalling vote thought that this is a necessary amendment.

I included most of the modifications suggested here and now it will be the polls that decide if they aggree or not with the final full version of proposal that follows:

Title
HIP-8: Accept 352 pixels as minimum dimension in video submissions

1 Like