I am not anal about quality but i definitely feel bad if the movie i'm watching is all pixelated :| Sometimes Scene only care about fastest Pre and don't put in that extra time to needed to encode a better quality rip.
Printable View
I am not anal about quality but i definitely feel bad if the movie i'm watching is all pixelated :| Sometimes Scene only care about fastest Pre and don't put in that extra time to needed to encode a better quality rip.
Oh the irony. At least most scene groups use "raw" sources. Let's use the first high profile screener of 2011, Drive. The source all the p2p groups used was "Drive 2011 SCREENER-P2P" (filename: DRIVE_V10.m4v, size: 707 MB), so how did 'TCM' (filename: DRIVE.SCREENER.TCM.avi, size: 1.16 GB) manage to add an additional 480.84 MB to that?Quote:
Originally Posted by mitraark
From nfo:
I can understand the other groups reason for size increases, they converted 2ch audio to 5.1 (don't laugh) and added their 'personal' filters (ie. random calculations on their 1-click app)Quote:
work done : converted to a avi[xvid] little sharping resize and contrast tweek there is a sample download it and check it!!
I am over 6ft 6inches and my biggest problem is more the legspace in all the decent or good seats. Every time I've been to the cinema for the last 15 or so years, I have either been sitting quite uncomfortably or had terrible seats. All the ones with no seats in front have me blocking smaller people behind me and/or bad viewing angle.Quote:
Originally Posted by iLOVENZB
There are lots of great SD X264 encoding groups or individuals. The only problem is that they are spread around many sites and do site internal encodes. When those are not available I use e.g. TL or even at times public sites to find movies that are done better than their scene counterparts. On a site like TL you search for a movie, sort by size and exclude any of the 720 XviD and everything under e.g. 1.4GB depending on type and lenght of the movie. Pretty much if the scene release is 2CD, you should look for around 3CD size unless you find a X264 rip. I can't remember the last time I watched a scene encode of either action or horror that I was happy with.
BTW if you know of other sources for great rips than the regular ones, then please do tell.
Curse not the movie theatres for being blind to your concerns ,rather curse God for making you a freak my friend.:no:Quote:
Originally Posted by Night0wl
Also instead of worrying about blocking the view of smaller people maybe consider grinding their bones to make your bread.:)
Oh I'm not worried at all. I just download to my hearts' content, what I otherwise would be using my hard earned cash on. With the awesome quality bluray sourced non-scene movies I've been downloading for the last few years, I actually am starting to prefer watching movies in my living room with friends, rather than wasting money on the unfulfilling cinema experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by IdolEyes787
I know you think quality shouldn't matter, but in reality I have a much broader selection to choose from than you, because the movie doesn't even have to be that good to enjoy it. Maybe for the wrong reasons, but who cares ;)
There are 101 synonymous phrases that could communicate the same idea. Starting with some of the most obvious to the more derived:Quote:
Originally Posted by Night0wl
-As long as it's HD, I like watching shitty movies.
-Ooh shiny.
-I think you should shit in my mouth first, because if it's already full of piss, the feces might float out.
-When I fall over and hit my head, it's over a 6 ft drop.
97 more to come!
*My wife comforts me by saying something very similar to that after our lovemaking so I'm assuming that the same thing also applies to movies.*Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmackyThere are 101 synonymous phrases that could communicate the same idea. Starting with some of the most obvious to the more derived:Quote:
Originally Posted by Night0wl
-As long as it's HD, I like watching shitty movies.
-Ooh shiny.
-I think you should shit in my mouth first, because if it's already full of piss, the feces might float out.
-When I fall over and hit my head, it's over a 6 ft drop.
97 more to come!*
* Of course my brain is pretty oxygen starved at this altitude so I might be hallucinating.
I'm not going to quote like 50 posts in the thread but could someone throw me the reference to a release where a p2p has done a better encode compared to the scene.
I disagree, guys at DMCA are not starving wanderers, they have enough information and resources at their disposal which could be used to focus anywhere anytime, even a regular torrentier knows a good bit of "where" and "who" respectively. They wouldn't be blinded if there are too many to spot, will they? so I'm not going to buy this theory. Supply wouldn't fall short either as long as their is demand and means available, I don't care to elaborate on this any further.Quote:
Originally Posted by temisturk
Having more sources then actually ever required at the cost of quality is unacceptable to me. A private trackers shouldn't be used as a testing/learning ground to make good encodes. It'll frustrate me far more then the copyright guys with that other equation. There should be some criteria quality wise to be able to upload stuff. IPT requires 150 kB/s up for the members to have when applying for the uploaders status, why is that? to facilitate the downloaders, right? still, who would want to download a shitty encode at that speed? It's also a complete wastage of time and bandwidth it takes to make encodes, upload 'em then download 'em and finally going back the comments page to yell at the uploader. Also, it hurts the retention rates of a certain release having too many encodes.
Yeah, it adds to the choices but it's only an illusion. If you're quality conscious, you wouldn't go on to watch everything encoded by some teenage, first time encoder. It's like five hens around amidst one chicken, it ain't serve as a choice if you're a gay. Yeah, they're free but still most of us can't spare six hours a day and 15/20 GB per release just to find the right encode even if they're unemployed and ultra-rich.
That's like asking for a place that sells better burgers than McDonald's.Quote:
Originally Posted by whatcdfan
If you're quality conscious, you wouldn't be watching encodes, period.Quote:
Originally Posted by whatcdfan
And why exactly would that be? Proper Bluray sourced SD encodes are much better than the DVD at close to the same size. By that I mean 576p.Bluray.x264 encodes. PAL width only with square pixels instead of Anamorphic. and more often than not 640Kbps DD5.1 audio encoded from HD or even lossless audio, where the DVD has either DTS which would be maybe a very slight bit better or 384/480Kbps DD5.1 audio which is often worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by temisturkIf you're quality conscious, you wouldn't be watching encodes, period.Quote:
Originally Posted by whatcdfan
When watching a good encode you have no indication at all that you are watching an encode, which should be the point of it all. Unfortunately when it comes to scene content they concentrate on acceptable (by scene rules) quality and speed. The scene groups do exactly the same with HD content, both movies and TV. The groups doing internal tracker encodes almost always if not always, do a better job. Why should I download a 40GB release, when a proper group or individual can make those 40GB into 10-15GB at very close to the same quality?
The original content comes first and proper P2P encodes always end up between them and the scene releases.
I do find it funny how the scene groups will starve HD encodes to the brink while at the same time using double or more of needed space for audio of better quality. If they wanted to do a proper rip while adhering to the size standards, they could at least use 640 or 480Kbps DD5.1 audio and use the extra space left to do a better video encode.
Because you either want the highest quality or you're satisfied to accept less. If you want the highest quality you download rips. If you're satisfied with less then quibbling over whether people should be permitted to reduce quality by 10% (or whatever arbitrary figure you want) but never by 11% is just being precious. As the size of the encodes and the track records of the encoders decreases then so, generally, does the quality. Some people have less than wonderful bandwidth, and less than wonderful large screen TV's. There is no reason at all why they should be denied the right to to download less than perfect encodes just because some techno-elitist wants to be able to download without having to bother checking the specs of what it is they're downloading.
What is wrong with wanting the highest quality possible at a smaller size due to bandwidth restrictions? There is quite a bit of difference between a 40GB Bluray and a shitty and rushed 700/1400MB scene encode, so why shouldn't I spend 10 minutes extra to find and download a good encode at an acceptable size?
This makes sense, I approach pornography the same way. If I can't find a perfect 10, 17-year-old, recently deflowered nubile getting gangbanged by a bunch of dudes that are the ethnic equivalents of myself, then I simply masturbate to a Larry King lookalike wrapping baby possums into his flaccid scrotum.Quote:
Originally Posted by temisturk
Cowboys.and.Aliens.DVDRip.XviD-NeDiVx is a good example of a movie that while pretty entertaining it really isn't all that great. Try comparing it to one of the many SD x264 encodes floating around the net. Then you should see why many prefer P2P x264. Or if feeling brave maybe even try a bigger sized XviD, that while not much better would still be better.
I haven't even watched the NeDiVx release but I have watched other rips from the group and have been highly disappointed with the quality.
I watched a high resolution x264 of Cowboys and Aliens, but still managed to find the movie to be an utter piece of crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Night0wl
I really wish better movies, or at least mediocre movies, were used in these examples. C&A... The Thing (2011)... the best copy is no copy.
Sorry. I thought you were arguing that lower quality encodes shouldn't be permitted. Not that they should be ignored by downloaders. I absolutely agree that a few minutes extra work when choosing a movie which you're going to spend a couple of hours watching is well worth the effort.Quote:
Originally Posted by Night0wl
This discussion is endless and pointless..... there is such a diversity out there in order to satisfy everyone...
So many good private trackers that have great internals or make a good selection... ipt is not representative in any way... it's just another tracker, a huge an almost semipublic one, suited mostly for starters, with no strict rules..etc (like demonoid, filelist.ro, etc..).. big 0day trackers (revtt, tl, scc, gft, etc..) are mostly for convenient, indoctrinated or ignorant people...
And for the vast majority of people, the quality is not measured in algorithms, formulas or parameters of codecs, containers etc...it is something measured my far more subjective criteria..
In the end, everybody should download what it likes and be happy!! due the vast majority, if anybody can not do this, it means it is incapable, and i would send him (i know, ugly advice) to cinema or multimedia stores!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucifer9999
Seriously "ignorant people"? Please explain to me exactly how by choosing not to overly concern oneself about something that is essentially a diversion is akin to being "ignorant"?
I can only hope it is a poor grasp of English and not a total lack of intelligence that resulted in your use of that word.
PS if bt is truly now entirely about form over substance than someone globally ban me please.
PPS strangely I am doubting that I will be seeing any review of The Artist by some "elite" encoder anytime soon.On the other hand Twilight Breaking Dawn probably will look great when it's released though.:mellow:
@idoleyes... ok.. first explain this phrase: "by choosing not to overly concern oneself about something that is essentially a diversion is akin to being "ignorant"? "
i can understand the words individually, but i can not get the sense of it... without that, i can not form a proper answer..thx...
I watched it in raw 2k and still found it to be a piece of pooh. Probably the only film I can honestly I've slept through, I kept getting waken up however when the score quickened or an alien shot something. Fuck you Harry Gregson-Williams!Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmackyI watched a high resolution x264 of Cowboys and Aliens, but still managed to find the movie to be an utter piece of crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Night0wl
I really wish better movies, or at least mediocre movies, were used in these examples. C&A... The Thing (2011)... the best copy is no copy.
Fine, another example then:
Final Destination 5 RERip DVDRip XviD-TWiZTED vs. Final Destination 5 2011 BRRip XviD AC3-SANTi
TWiSTED always disappoints, SANTi never does, nor do they/he/she? mess with colors etc. unlike mane other less than perfect P2P groups. Haven't watched the movie.. doubt I will watch it, but someone asked for examples.
It's not fair to compare a DVDRip and BRRip.Quote:
Originally Posted by Night0wl
I see now that you are just doing it on purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Night0wl
I like the fact they used TWiZTED's 1080p source.Quote:
Originally Posted by Night0wl
It doesn't matter what source they used nor if it's a DVDRip or BRRip. What matter is that you with your scene only have a choice between either a DVDsized 720p or a 700MB rip, while we have the choice of something in between. Try both and then tell me there is no need for P2P.
The scene can never do a BDRip now, P2P can. P2P can also do x264 of this gem that only has 11 different releases in all resolutions so far. 39ish more tries to get it right.
If you use scene only trackers good luck finding any R5s, TSs, PPVs, and VODs because I don't see the scene ever bringing that to the table. Simple answer is just know what your looking for and maybe follow a group you like!
We have a choice of:
XviD rip
x264 SD rip (See: http://filesharingtalk.com/threads/4...=1#post3633736)
DVDR
720p/1080p
BDR50
There is no need for inbetween. Basically what you're trying to say is that p2p needs:
FULLBD (BDR) -> 1080p > 720p -> m-HD/DVDRip (m-720p/m-1080p) -> 300mb mkv -> 240p iPhone/mobile encode
Yes, the scene went through a faze of encoding for PSP but that didn't last long (See: http://orlydb.com/?q=psp+mp4) .
I'll let Idol finish this considering him and I share similar views with pre-retail.Quote:
Originally Posted by nthekno
Another day, another 10,000 encodes:
http://i.imgur.com/je0d0.png
Hasn't even been 24 hours.
A good example where there isn't even a proper scene release. Good thing we have P2P.
< query > [ XviD ] The.Inbetweeners.The.Movie.2011.iNTERNAL.DVDRip.XviD-RAWNiTRO [ 49F in 735.9MB ]
< info > The.Inbetweeners.The.Movie.2011.iNTERNAL.DVDRip.XviD-RAWNiTRO [ Comedy ]
7th from the top on that list.
Representing 11.4 % of the total snatches, I'm sure lots of people would be happy to have that one as their only choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by iLOVENZB
forgive me for saying so, but the whole premise of this thread seems like a rehash of a mac fanboy debate. Some people like scene rips, some don't. Having options is never a bad thing in a realm where quality doesn't always matter as much as some would like.
We have a thread here that states, "Why you all should all buy Apple computers"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Intr4ns1t
I'm sure it's in teh lounge mj.Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmackyWe have a thread here that states, "Why you all should all buy Apple computers"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Intr4ns1t
I believe you have misunderstood what iNTERNAL means. and to top it off it's 1CD or probably more than 1CD, which is why it's internal. I don't really see them having a 36MB sample for a 700MB encode.Quote:
Originally Posted by iLOVENZB
Oh yeah I know how to check a pre db as well as well as the 0-day sites. That is the only scene release, which isn't per the rules a scene release, at the time of your post.
finally a good sense post!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Intr4ns1t
@ilovenzb -> particular examples from a particular tracker is hardly a proof or a generalization... you'll never obtain an objective point of view in this rhythm..
lmfao
Rubbish data caps imposed upon me by my ISP (there's no alternative in this country. ALL ISP's have data caps) prevent me downloading HD content. And I watch everything I DL streamed to either an Xbox360 or PS3. Neither of which will play x264 encodes. So I'm left stuck with Xvid releases. :(
So you're saying scene INT releases aren't scene? Does p2p even have ruleset? Going by your logic most p2p releases should be the equivilant of scene INT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Night0wlI believe you have misunderstood what iNTERNAL means. and to top it off it's 1CD or probably more than 1CD, which is why it's internal. I don't really see them having a 36MB sample for a 700MB encode.Quote:
Originally Posted by iLOVENZB
Oh yeah I know how to check a pre db as well as well as the 0-day sites. That is the only scene release, which isn't per the rules a scene release, at the time of your post.
I guess you're right: (AO)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucifer9999finally a good sense post!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Intr4ns1t
@ilovenzb -> particular examples from a particular tracker is hardly a proof or a generalization... you'll never obtain an objective point of view in this rhythm..
http://i.imgur.com/zfjZf.png
... however there is a tracker non-obtrusive amount of torrents (tC)
http://i.imgur.com/LhwTZ.png