Why has HDBits banned Eureka?

[Unstable1]

Hi

Does anyone know why HDBits has banned Eureka encodes? I'm not asking for any reason other than sheer noseyness, but daren't ask on the HDB's forums just in case it pisses off a mod.

I've been watching a few Eureka encodes recently and am really impressed by the quality and the fact that they are all encoded with DXVA enabled (Hardware Acceleration).

I like CtrlHD and ESiR releases but I'm coming to the conclusion that Eureka encodes offer better picture quality.

[TakeMS]

DOWNLOAD them from bithdtv. what difference makes?

[Unstable1]

DOWNLOAD them from bithdtv. what difference makes?

That's exactly what I plan on doing, but you're not answering my question.

[integral]

No idea, they probably only want their little inhouse encoders?

[Roark]

I'm guessing at Eureka's request?

[athenaesword]

if eureka's rips ended up on hdbits there'd really be no point of having bit-hdtv lol.

[ryan20021982]

There weird that way

even with there rule about upload there file at other sites
even if they arent there internal releases they get pissed

there proly mad they wont come there...lol

[czlada]

Eureka its internal bit-hdtv group !!

[C-mos]

yes +1 czlada

[anjelik]

Because they lack brain.And they are jealous with their jobs.

[Unstable1]

Eureka its internal bit-hdtv group !!


Is this definitely the reason, because I thought HDBits did used to allow Eureka encodes. I was under the impression that they have only recently banned Eureka, or maybe I'm mistaken.

[kelfa]

Eureka is bit-hdtv top encoders...THey dont wan't the two sites swapping encodes of their internals.

[athenaesword]

Eureka is bit-hdtv top encoders...THey dont wan't the two sites swapping encodes of their internals.

so quality-wise, disregarding size of rips, are there esir/ctrlhd gang or eureka better?

[hotshot6473]

Eureka is better for 1080p content hands down

[ryan20021982]

Eureka is bit-hdtv top encoders...THey dont wan't the two sites swapping encodes of their internals.

If that was the case you wouldnt see any hdbits internal releases at bit-hdtv
But we all know thats not the case.

[athenaesword]

Eureka is better for 1080p content hands down

quantity-wise or quality? i know they've got quite alot of 1080p, which sometimes ctrlhd/esir don't put out, but i've never actually compared screens. maybe I should give Eureka a shot?

[kelfa]

I will put a few side by side and take a look at which is better quality. I know those Eureka rips are large tho, usually 11-14gb for a 1080p with a very high bitrate. Good thing they are all dxva compatible. Only thing that sucks is you cant back them up to dvdr-dl.

[athenaesword]

I will put a few side by side and take a look at which is better quality. I know those Eureka rips are large tho, usually 11-14gb for a 1080p with a very high bitrate. Good thing they are all dxva compatible. Only thing that sucks is you cant back them up to dvdr-dl.

I think it's a good thing people are starting to break away from burning DVDs. with the number of movies I have on the computer, I'd prolly need quite a few hundred DVDs. besides, hdds are so cheap now. just dump em all in there.... it's not like the DVD can playback HD anyway.

so I really don't care if they fit into DVDs.

[AMnesko]

Eureka is bit-hdtv top encoders...THey dont wan't the two sites swapping encodes of their internals.

If that was the case you wouldnt see any hdbits internal releases at bit-hdtv
But we all know thats not the case.
I think this whole conflict between HDbits and Bit-HDTV is just a waste of time. EuReKa releases are very good, and they were popular and respected when HDbits still had them. But now that the site banned them, they suck all the sudden. I think HDbits have the wrong attitude regarding this matter. After all, isn`t having the best release, regardless of it`s name, the whole point? Or what? We should disconsider all other releases that might be better just because they do not have ESiR or CtrlHD written on them? No, man, that`s not how you`re supposed to think. Quality before the brand!

[yayyyyyy]

if eureka's rips ended up on hdbits there'd really be no point of having bit-hdtv lol.
that's the reason :pinch:

[Unstable1]

Well, it isn't going to help hdbits banning eureka. Now that I've realised Eureka encodes are superior to ESiR and CtrlHD, I will be downloading all new films from BitHDTV if Eureka has done a release. Therefor, my useage of HDBits will lessen which can only be a bad thing for the site.

Until now, virtually all my HD downloads have been from HDBits, but from now on, I won't download anything until I've checked if Eureka has done a release on BitHDTV.

Therefor, by banning Eureka, HDBits is basically pushing people to using BitHDTV more, which I'm sure isn't what they want.

HDBits should do one of two things. They should either allow Eureka releases or they should encourage encoders like ESiR and CtrlHD to make bigger rips for 1080P material. A 12GB encode of a 1080P movie is always going to be superior to an 8GB encode if done properly, which is exactly why Eureka encodes look so great.

If you're "listening" HDBits, move away from 8GB 1080P rips. Get the encoders doing 10-12GB rips as standard, quality should come first. I mean, who in their right minds back HD movies up to DVD-R anyway?

[puckface]

Eureka is always freeleech at BitHDTV, why would you even d/l the same thing from HDBits if that's the case.

[athenaesword]

Well, it isn't going to help hdbits banning eureka. Now that I've realised Eureka encodes are superior to ESiR and CtrlHD, I will be downloading all new films from BitHDTV if Eureka has done a release. Therefor, my useage of HDBits will lessen which can only be a bad thing for the site.

Until now, virtually all my HD downloads have been from HDBits, but from now on, I won't download anything until I've checked if Eureka has done a release on BitHDTV.

Therefor, by banning Eureka, HDBits is basically pushing people to using BitHDTV more, which I'm sure isn't what they want.

HDBits should do one of two things. They should either allow Eureka releases or they should encourage encoders like ESiR and CtrlHD to make bigger rips for 1080P material. A 12GB encode of a 1080P movie is always going to be superior to an 8GB encode if done properly, which is exactly why Eureka encodes look so great.

If you're "listening" HDBits, move away from 8GB 1080P rips. Get the encoders doing 10-12GB rips as standard, quality should come first. I mean, who in their right minds back HD movies up to DVD-R anyway?

is that a fact? that Eureka rips are superior? someone mentioned posting up screens but it hasn't happened yet


I will put a few side by side and take a look at which is better quality. I know those Eureka rips are large tho, usually 11-14gb for a 1080p with a very high bitrate. Good thing they are all dxva compatible. Only thing that sucks is you cant back them up to dvdr-dl.

hey mate those screens coming?

[Unstable1]

Eureka is always freeleech at BitHDTV, why would you even d/l the same thing from HDBits if that's the case.


Oh I didnt realise that. Apart from new torrents, download speeds and longevity of torrents is much better at HDBits than BitHDTV. Also, I suppose I just feel more inclined to use HDBits, out of loyalty.


is that a fact? that Eureka rips are superior? someone mentioned posting up screens but it hasn't happened yet


Just download a few Eureka rips and you will be able to see the improvement in picture quality over other encoders. As I said, a 10-12GB encode is always going to be superior to an 8GB rip because of the higher bitrate. The higher the bitrate, the better the picture quality and closer to the original source it will be.

[piratebot]

screens comparison?

[Unstable1]

screens comparison?

Don't you understand that a higher bitrate encode will improve picture quality!! :rolleyes:

I can't be arsed going through the effort of posting up screenies, you can do the work yourself, I'm not here to preach the superiority of Eureka, it's a conclusion I've come to myself and I don't particularly care if you believe me nor do I feel the need to prove it to you or anyone else.

Perhaps someone else more motivated than me will post up screen comparisons.

[piratebot]

Don't you understand that an excessively higher bitrate isn't needed for an encode to be transparent to the source?

[DouglasQuaid]

comparing wall-e 720p pics... EuReKa looks better (the background on ESiR looks fuzzier and the AR on EuReKA looks more appealing)
I wish there was a site that compared quality and indicated the better release to get
with all these encodes, it can be hard to decide. Maybe a vote system, #1 720p rls and #1 1080p rls

[Unstable1]

Don't you understand that an excessively higher bitrate isn't needed for an encode to be transparent to the source?

I understand that the bitrate alone isn't everything that makes a good encode, but it is a significant factor.

[ryan20021982]

Eurekas wall-e 720 is lower bitrate than esir's release so its not that
there encodes are higher bitrate.

They are just better all around

[athenaesword]

screens comparison?

Don't you understand that a higher bitrate encode will improve picture quality!! :rolleyes:

I can't be arsed going through the effort of posting up screenies, you can do the work yourself, I'm not here to preach the superiority of Eureka, it's a conclusion I've come to myself and I don't particularly care if you believe me nor do I feel the need to prove it to you or anyone else.

Perhaps someone else more motivated than me will post up screen comparisons.

from what I've read thus far, bitrate is not the all-and-all deciding factor of video quality.

[puckface]

from what I've read thus far, bitrate is not the all-and-all deciding factor of video quality.

While bitrate is not the all and all deciding factor, it helps quite a bit. Encoding profile also has a bit to do with it. Color saturation or lack thereof also does have an effect. Some of us also care about audio bitrate and format as well.

While ESIR and CtrlHD are great, Eureka is just as good if not better (for 1080p encodes). What it all comes down to is your eye and your preference. I watched the Eureka encode of JFK last night and thought it was one of the best encodes I have seen in a while (as I usually watch BD Rips), even though it was only 7.5MBit, PQ was great as were the colors. But at 13.5GB Im sure its not for everyone.

Also keep in mind bitrate is an average. For movies like JFK, there is a lot of archival footage that is not true HD thus encoded at a lower bitrate.. this is something you also have to keep in mind. Also, movies that have less detail or a lot of dark scenes will encode at lower bitrates as well.

[lukee]

I will put a few side by side and take a look at which is better quality. I know those Eureka rips are large tho, usually 11-14gb for a 1080p with a very high bitrate. Good thing they are all dxva compatible. Only thing that sucks is you cant back them up to dvdr-dl.


Newegg.ca - Western Digital Elements WDE1U10000N 1TB USB 2.0 External Hard Drive - External Hard Drives (http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136299)


HARDDRIVES FFS

[bolie]

I will put a few side by side and take a look at which is better quality. I know those Eureka rips are large tho, usually 11-14gb for a 1080p with a very high bitrate. Good thing they are all dxva compatible. Only thing that sucks is you cant back them up to dvdr-dl.


Newegg.ca - Western Digital Elements WDE1U10000N 1TB USB 2.0 External Hard Drive - External Hard Drives (http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136299)


HARDDRIVES FFS

And "Free Shipping" !!!! :D

[phosphors]

So what if I want to upload my own full quality encode to hdbits, are they just going to say its eureka...its sad how every single upload has to be ultra-compressed.

[piratebot]

I will put a few side by side and take a look at which is better quality. I know those Eureka rips are large tho, usually 11-14gb for a 1080p with a very high bitrate. Good thing they are all dxva compatible. Only thing that sucks is you cant back them up to dvdr-dl.


Newegg.ca - Western Digital Elements WDE1U10000N 1TB USB 2.0 External Hard Drive - External Hard Drives (http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136299)


HARDDRIVES FFS
usb 2.0 is too slow for me imo.

[athenaesword]

Newegg.ca - Western Digital Elements WDE1U10000N 1TB USB 2.0 External Hard Drive - External Hard Drives (http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136299)


HARDDRIVES FFS
usb 2.0 is too slow for me imo.


haha. THAT's why he prefers dvdr!?

for the record, my computer plays 1080p fine via usb2.0





from what I've read thus far, bitrate is not the all-and-all deciding factor of video quality.

While bitrate is not the all and all deciding factor, it helps quite a bit. Encoding profile also has a bit to do with it. Color saturation or lack thereof also does have an effect. Some of us also care about audio bitrate and format as well.

While ESIR and CtrlHD are great, Eureka is just as good if not better (for 1080p encodes). What it all comes down to is your eye and your preference. I watched the Eureka encode of JFK last night and thought it was one of the best encodes I have seen in a while (as I usually watch BD Rips), even though it was only 7.5MBit, PQ was great as were the colors. But at 13.5GB Im sure its not for everyone.

Also keep in mind bitrate is an average. For movies like JFK, there is a lot of archival footage that is not true HD thus encoded at a lower bitrate.. this is something you also have to keep in mind. Also, movies that have less detail or a lot of dark scenes will encode at lower bitrates as well.

right so you're saying, Eureka releases > Esir/CtrlHD in terms of absolute picture quality? I'm on both BHD and HDB so I'm flexible. just need a few more opinions on this and i'll transfer some of my bookmarks on HDB to BHD for when I get my new HDD at the end of the month.

[puckface]

right so you're saying, Eureka releases > Esir/CtrlHD in terms of absolute picture quality? I'm on both BHD and HDB so I'm flexible. just need a few more opinions on this and i'll transfer some of my bookmarks on HDB to BHD for when I get my new HDD at the end of the month.

No, what I'm saying is that they are all very good and you cant go wring with any of them, and that you have to make your own judgement. Eureka stuff is always free leech on Bit-HDTV so why not try one out, no reason not to, I say you can go wrong with a 1080p Eureka encode, the d/l an ESIR or CtrlHD 1080p and see what you like better, everyones preference is different. Try for yourself.

EDIT: not in response to the poster I quoted, but why would anyone want HD rips that fit on DVD or DL DVD? If you want a DVD download a DVD... makes absolutely no sense.

[phosphors]

EDIT: not in response to the poster I quoted, but why would anyone want HD rips that fit on DVD or DL DVD? If you want a DVD download a DVD... makes absolutely no sense.

And what size do you download SD movie?, isn't it 1cd (700mb) or 2cd (1400mb) size?.So then if you want a cd, buy a cd, makes no sense either...

[athenaesword]

EDIT: not in response to the poster I quoted, but why would anyone want HD rips that fit on DVD or DL DVD? If you want a DVD download a DVD... makes absolutely no sense.

And what size do you download SD movie?, isn't it 1cd (700mb) or 2cd (1400mb) size?.So then if you want a cd, buy a cd, makes no sense either...
well dvdrs are 4gb+ so you can download those to fit exactly on the dvd. don't get your point. in any case. dvd backups are obsolete. hdd ftw.





right so you're saying, Eureka releases > Esir/CtrlHD in terms of absolute picture quality? I'm on both BHD and HDB so I'm flexible. just need a few more opinions on this and i'll transfer some of my bookmarks on HDB to BHD for when I get my new HDD at the end of the month.

No, what I'm saying is that they are all very good and you cant go wring with any of them, and that you have to make your own judgement. Eureka stuff is always free leech on Bit-HDTV so why not try one out, no reason not to, I say you can go wrong with a 1080p Eureka encode, the d/l an ESIR or CtrlHD 1080p and see what you like better, everyones preference is different. Try for yourself.

EDIT: not in response to the poster I quoted, but why would anyone want HD rips that fit on DVD or DL DVD? If you want a DVD download a DVD... makes absolutely no sense.

reason why i ask is cus i don't have a screen large enough to test out yet, so i'm willing to rely on the opinions of those who do. i'm planning to buy one, but wouldn't wish to have to redownload everything.

if you're talking about audio hardware then yes maybe it's more up to preference, but with videos, it's usually fairly obvious which is better, if there's any visual difference to be discerned in the first place of course. unless you're talking about preference for grain/specific AR, which I'm assuming we aren't.

yeah i might d/l some when i get my new hdd and compare screens on my computer, but currently 99% of my 2.5TB is filled :s can only get a new TB end of this month.

[puckface]

EDIT: not in response to the poster I quoted, but why would anyone want HD rips that fit on DVD or DL DVD? If you want a DVD download a DVD... makes absolutely no sense.

And what size do you download SD movie?, isn't it 1cd (700mb) or 2cd (1400mb) size?.So then if you want a cd, buy a cd, makes no sense either...

as far as I know SD movies are around 4.4GB, while DL SD Movies are around 7-9 GB

[phosphors]

And what size do you download SD movie?, isn't it 1cd (700mb) or 2cd (1400mb) size?.So then if you want a cd, buy a cd, makes no sense either...

as far as I know SD movies are around 4.4GB, while DL SD Movies are around 7-9 GB

:blink:

So are you telling me when you download an SD movie, you always get the full 4.4gb disc?, do you expect everyone to do that?.

well then HD discs are 20-50 gb as well, do you download those as well?, or are you just talking shit?.

[lukee]

Newegg.ca - Western Digital Elements WDE1U10000N 1TB USB 2.0 External Hard Drive - External Hard Drives (http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136299)


HARDDRIVES FFS
usb 2.0 is too slow for me imo.


My bad.


Newegg.ca - SAMSUNG Spinpoint F1 HD103UJ 1TB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - Internal Hard Drives (http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152102)

[ryan20021982]

but why would anyone want HD rips that fit on DVD or DL DVD? If you want a DVD download a DVD... makes absolutely no sense.

Exactly you should download HD rips for the quality not the size

[puckface]

as far as I know SD movies are around 4.4GB, while DL SD Movies are around 7-9 GB

:blink:

So are you telling me when you download an SD movie, you always get the full 4.4gb disc?, do you expect everyone to do that?.

well then HD discs are 20-50 gb as well, do you download those as well?, or are you just talking shit?.

dude, you asked a question and I answered, I mean if you want to download a divx movie and watch it on your 22 inch computer monitor, go to town. The point is, if you want quality, file size goes along with that. Downloading HD shit because it will fit on a DVD defeats the whole purpose.

And yes I download BluRay, as I think I stated in an earlier post. Get a HDD, and accunt at HD bits and one of these (http://www.popcornhour.com/onlinestore/index.php?pluginoption=catalog&task=info&item_id=6&main_id=0&category_id=) with a TV and you'll love life.

[piratebot]

usb 2.0 is too slow for me imo.


My bad.


Newegg.ca - SAMSUNG Spinpoint F1 HD103UJ 1TB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - Internal Hard Drives (http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152102)
:D actually i have that. only thing bad i have to say is that it has a loud startup.

[fstalk]

there are some troubles between BitHDTV and HDBits

[AMnesko]

there are some troubles between BitHDTV and HDBits
No shit! They hate each other`s guts!