Printable View
Daniel, good job in answering athenaesword's questions. :)
I'd like to add that if you have a HDTV below 50", 720p would be good enough.
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6449_7-...-1.html?tag=msQuote:
The extra sharpness afforded by the 1080p televisions he's seen is noticeable only when watching 1080i or 1080p sources on a larger screens, say 55 inches and bigger, or with projectors that display a wall-size picture.
nice read GoldStoNe ;) and yeah daniel definitely deserves some form of honorary mention here lol. perhaps open a HD section for him to mod ^^Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldStoNe
i'm going to check out what my TV really is lol. all i really know about it now is that it's 50" and it supports HDMI. i'm not even sure if it's full HD like daniel mentioned.
I concur with GoldStoNe and I even said something similar in an earlier post to the extent that full HD screens are only worth it from a certain size on or the additional money spent is definitely wasted. Where this limit is depends on a couple of details like the distance between the screen and yourself. If you're farther away than three times the height of your screen (I don't know if this is a golden rule or not but this has done well in my own experience) then it doesn't really matter much which size or resolution your screen is, you're unlikely to see much of a difference between 720p and 1080p anyway.
Also, like the article correctly stated, the full HD resolution invites people to sit closer to the screen - what had been a sin with previous crt technology now lets you experience a felt bigger picture without loss of quality. If this is one more of the advantages you don't or can't use, then it's another point against the use of 1080p.
Oh and ... I'd like a HD section here at FST because for many users it would be a start to make hdtv more than a mere denomination they read in the titles of their xvid-tv-rips. Moderating it on the other hand, don't even start with that please ;) Not only am I too lazy for that but it would be too much of an effort because most people here lack the experience to be remotely objective or helpful and it even shows in this thread (for example: some recommended SEPTiC while everyone who's a regular on hd trackers knows they're far from the best .. but it's easy to get that impression if you've only got your standard 480p xvid dvdrip to compare them with).
I am usually very happy that I can just drop in, ask a question or answer one for that matter and then go my merry way again like I do it on highdefforum.com which is an okay source for this kind of topic as well (though I don't know how well you'll be received if you ask for technical help on the movies from the internet stuff).
CTU and hv for me
hV , ESiR , SEPTiC
SEPTiC again haha.
looks like i might wanna concentrate on 720p over 1080p now since the difference doesn't seem to be worth the file size increase. would the increase in resolution from a 1080p be able to make up for a poor 720p encode? from what you've said, it probably wouldn't but i thought i'd ask just to be sure.
also, this's probably a little OT, but since it's my thread.. ;) issit safe to watch these plasma/LCD TVs at such close range nowadays? i sorta lost interest in TVs years ago so i'm a little rusty with the crt - lcd/plasma conversion era.
i think i've come across highdefforum before, but i didn't stay for long cus i realised alot of the threads were begs for hdbits.org invites. yeah it'll be nice to have a HD subforum, probably under the movies section. it's not like those discussion sections are heavily modded anyway; i mean, there's no point in enforcing strict rules about general discussion. there's an anime section, which is quite underutilised, so why not a HD section? there're clearly alot of people who need to be educated in HD, people like myself.
Mmh, there's another thing I have to clear up a bit. What makes a bad encode - or why do scene groups have this bad reputation among hd enthusiasts? Lets start from the other end: what makes a good encode? Little or no visible blocking, keeping the original hue/coloring, keeping the original details including any sharpness/blurring, keeping the original aspect ratio. What scene groups don't always get right are these details that do not necessarily make the movie look bad - but in comparison with the original or a proper encode those differences can be very obvious. The main goal an encoder aspires is to create a copy of a movie that looks just like the original ... and some groups fail in that task more often than others ;) It doesn't always mean the end result looks bad but it's not authentic enough for those enthusiasts.Quote:
Originally Posted by athenaesword
It is one of the distinct advantages of the digital display technology to be closer to the screen and still have a sharp enough picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by athenaesword
yeah but is this healthy for your eyes? We all used to blame CRT TVs for ruining our eyesight since youth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
spectic imo
:ermm:Quote:
Originally Posted by zaa730
i just like lol
ctrlhd and esir are good
That was true for CRT tv's, yes. Neither plasma nor any other kind of digital displays need a 'safe' viewing distance anymore because there is nothing harmful left. You can in fact sit as close as you want to your screen without any health issues popping up. Well, except for a possible headache if you see too much of the screen's pixel structure :D For a standard PC monitor the recommended distance is about 20 inches and the same process is applied to tv's.Quote:
Originally Posted by athenaeswordyeah but is this healthy for your eyes? We all used to blame CRT TVs for ruining our eyesight since youth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
This is something called 'recommended viewing distance' (ad-lib translation from my mother tongue) which determines a range based on your screen size rather than a fixed distance. For a 50" screen this is between 6 and 10 feet and you should test that, starting from the lower end - if it's possible at all in your living room setup. One word of advise: it doesn't help testing the distance with only one kind of high quality medium because at least over here in Europe, 480p non-hd content is still vastly dominating and you may receive a better result if you're not too close to the screen for that kind of torture ;)
CtrlHD 和SEPTiC
BTW：i have learned sth thx
My opinion:ESiR and CtrlHD
CtrlHD all the way!
CtrlHd, and Septic
All of them are good for me :)
ctrlhd, esir and goldstone. The only scene group that I like is hV.
CtrlHd for me
i like CTU and CtrlHD
I too try to stick to Esir and CtrlHD as I noticed the better quality.
Septic is quite terrible PQ wise, but I go to the other groups if I have to.
Eureka seems pretty good to me. Haven't seen anyone else mention them though.
CtrlHD
For me, CTU.
I would like to thank Daniel for the very useful and professional stuff here. Good job!
CtrlHD. They bring me the best movies in 1080p!
Usually ESiR and CtrlHD, my favorite movies are all released by them too, and the quality is the best ^^
exactly. can't thank him enough for sharing his knowledge here. I've basically gotten all my information on HD i needed to start out from him. we need more of members like these!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylar666
Aside from Esir and CtrlHD, Eureka's 1080p encodes are great. Very close to the source.
ctrlhd & esir
all the other groups over sharpen and waste a ton of bitrate
ESiR & SEPTiC
chakra by far the best release group imoQuote:
Originally Posted by athenaesword
hopefully everyone who is mentioning septic/chakra is joking... who knows though, maybe you guys are that dumb.
anyway, here is a list of great INTERNAL release groups/individuals on you know which tracker.
ESiR
CtrlHD
iLL
rabomil
NWO
HDL
NiX
QXE
XSHD
JAVLiU
Redµx
GoLDSToNE
ViNYL
Thora
H2
Crow
Prime
Zim'D
GMoRK
DiR
MMI
QDP
SLO
AE
S26
V
fLAMEhd
Ft4U
disc
FPG
Funner
YanY
k2
AW
VanRay
TM
ONYX
DoNOLi
OAS
DON
HDB
MdM
TSE
M794
KTN
MAGiC
PHiN
PiNG
Mojo
HDT
JCH
dude, no need to shout! :D
CTU & EuReKa.
CtrlHD
ESIR
EuReKA
agreed 100%Quote:
Originally Posted by ryan20021982
How come original BD movies are like 30-40Mbps bitrate when 5-6Mbps is enough in these encodes?
Sounds fishy.
Which groups actually do 720p releases at 1280x768?
I see a few 1280x534 on Bit-HDTV. Some where much bigger than others too. I was just browsing for Iron Man and there was 1 at 2.56 gigs and one at 4.41 gigs and a couple at t 6.6 gigs which is probably the one I would get.
What's generally the size of a really good quality 720p release?
Sorry I'm new to this. Normally I'll just get DVD9 DVDs but HD rips are better quality so I might as well get HD rips since they are smaller than DVD9 DVDs as well.
I'm also very curious about this, as I'm very new to HD too. I usually just go for the smallest size, and I always grab only 720p releases. The quality from what I've grabbed has always looked excellent(beautiful actually) to me. But would grabbing the larger file sizes of the same 720p movie mean better quality than the smaller file size?Quote:
Originally Posted by saulin