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

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

Aquí una traducción automática al español para facilitar el acceso a quienes no saben inglés:

Resumen sencillo
Aclarar que la definición de 360p no significa literalmente 360 píxeles, y que ciertos códecs recortan columnas de 4 píxeles de cada lado de la imagen. Los envíos con 352 píxeles de ancho no deben considerarse una violación de las normas de envío.

Resumen
Esta propuesta de enmienda es una solución rápida e inmediata a los problemas relacionados con un método generalizado de presentación de vídeos... Desplaza la dimensión mínima de la anchura o la altura de los vídeos de 360 a 352 para que coincida con lo que se puede hacer actualmente en la tecnología más extendida disponible. Los 8 píxeles eliminados recortados por el códec debido a la antigua norma analógica PAL no es mover la línea demasiado y se ajusta a la capacidad técnica de la tecnología generalizada actual. No es realista desafiar a una persona porque se eliminen 8 píxeles de un lado de la imagen (en el caso de que sea el fondo lo que se elimine del cuadro y no la imagen real). Esta modificación es definitiva y no pretende servir de precedente para mover el mínimo más allá de esto.

Motivación
La forma más habitual y sencilla de que un usuario profano envíe y transfiera un vídeo sin instalaciones ni conocimientos adicionales es enviarlo por WhatsApp y descargarlo a través de WhatsApp web. Para evitar impugnaciones oportunistas que se adelantan en estos envíos, que de otro modo serían un envío de buena fe, debería ponerse en marcha una modificación urgente de esta política. También levantaría algunos métodos artificiales y torpes que los nuevos usuarios actuales están utilizando y que degradan la plataforma para cumplir con los requisitos (recodificación del vídeo, relleno a los lados del mismo, etc.).

Especificación
Las dimensiones mínimas del vídeo son un cuadrado de 352 píxeles por 352 píxeles. Los vídeos con un tamaño igual o superior al indicado no se considerarán una violación de la norma nº 4 de las directrices de presentación. Los vídeos que tengan un tamaño igual o inferior a 351 píxeles en cualquiera de sus dimensiones infringirán la regla nº 4.

Esta es una resolución provisional hasta que se aprueben unas directrices más precisas sobre la calidad de los vídeos.

Implementación
Cambiar el texto de la regla número 4, sustituyendo este bloque de texto:

"La calidad del vídeo debe ser de al menos 360p, con una duración máxima de 2 minutos y en el formato
video/webm, video/MP4, video/avi o video/mov"

Con este bloque de texto:

Los vídeos enviados deben cumplir todos los requisitos siguientes:

   * una duración máxima de 2 minutos
   * en formato video/webm, video/MP4, video/avi o video/mov,
   * vertical (retrato), horizontal (paisaje) o cuadrado,

y seguir estos requisitos de tamaño mínimo:

   * Altura mínima: igual o superior a 352 píxeles
   * Anchura mínima: igual o superior a 352 píxeles

Justificación
Consulte la norma imprecisa sobre la calidad de vídeo de los envíos

Traducción realizada con la versión gratuita del traductor www.DeepL.com/Translator

Binding voting can be found here

Voting “No” for the reasons mentioned above.

Voting No, because of lack of discussion and vitiated by substantial procedural flaws.

All in all, replacing an imprecise policy with another imprecise policy is not the solution

This is a serious accusation, you better have facts to support them.

i was writing and it posted before finalization. sorry