What's the best 1080p Inception encode?
Printable View
What's the best 1080p Inception encode?
I don't think most of the p2p encoding groups have taken a shot at it yet, so it is too early to tell. REFiNED doesn't do a bad job usually, but the trolls on HDB whined a lot. I just noticed a source in the nzb section from a random site (NzbCave - I went to check on ABHDTV but seems my account needs to be renewed $$$) so maybe that will propagate and we'll see some good encodes.
the one made by warner bros and hoes grp. the quality still suck but they have exclusive access to original stuff
inception :ermm:
seems like you're not hard to please after all - in terms of movies at least.
You only think that because you haven't been blessed to watch a sufficiently good encode. I thought G.I Joe was terrible until.......Quote:
Originally Posted by cinephilia
Wait that's a bad example .
haha, you must be right.
whats wrong with the CtrlHD encode ?? 15 gigs, came out yesterday
Inception 2010 1080p BluRay DTS x264-CtrlHD
Yes Ctrlhd and EsiR usually have the best quality
CtrlHD? you're kidding, right? their encodes are camrips compared to those of FraMeSToR.
But do they have any release of inception??Quote:
Originally Posted by ignis
Negatory. I agree at this point CtrlHD is prob the best bet ATM.
I had a giggleQuote:
Originally Posted by ignis
Not yet, but knowing FraMeSToR, an Inception release is as inevitable as the fucking tide :DQuote:
Originally Posted by bijoy
FraMeSToR is a joke, CtrlHD was out within 2 days and is as close to 1:1 as it can be
The problem with HD: People follow groups instead of the best quality available.
By the way ignis, what the fuck is a camrip? Your ignorance in quality (unless you're blind, in that case I apologize) seems to only be topped by your ignorance in release types.
this!Quote:
Originally Posted by Detale
HDStar has best print out there the resolution is 1920 x 800 with DTSHD-MA audio and the size is jus around 17 GB i dont remeber other details i will post those when i get home if needed.
There is so many options to choose, but what we need is a real comparison in photo details...
photo details is not accurate at all... samples is all we need :p
INCEPTION 2010 BLURAY 1080P REMUX VC1 DTS-HD MA 5.1 MOVIE ONLY cave
Just get the BR iso.
Encodes are for the poor...
Or for 1 watch then delete,but not for archiving thats for sure :D
[email protected] VIDEO.CODEC....: MPEG-4 AVC@High Profile L4.1, 24.000/1.001 fps BIT.RATE.......: [email protected], 17.0G RESOLUTION.....: 1920 x 800, 2.400 : 1 AUDIO1.........: English DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 @ 3689 kbps CHAPTERS.......: YES SUBTiTLES......: 英简繁体SUP字幕 RIP.SOURCE.....: Inception 2010 Blu-ray 1080p VC-1 DTS-HD MA 5.1-CtrlHD here is the specsand the size is 17.05 for a dual audio
[email protected] VIDEO.CODEC....: MPEG-4 AVC@High Profile L4.1, 24.000/1.001 fps BIT.RATE.......: [email protected], 17.0G RESOLUTION.....: 1920 x 800, 2.400 : 1 AUDIO1.........: English DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 @ 3689 kbps CHAPTERS.......: YES SUBTiTLES......: 英简繁体SUP字幕 RIP.SOURCE.....: Inception 2010 Blu-ray 1080p VC-1 DTS-HD MA 5.1-CtrlHD here is the specs and the size is 17.05 for a dual audio
never understood, what's the point of screwing the video while leaving the huge bitrate audio track untouchedQuote:
Originally Posted by Shinzen
Because encoders are autistic.
Erm, 3689kbps isn't such a high bitrate, that's as much as most 24/96 vinyl rips. Even on a long movie, the audio would probably come to about to 2gb, and that's assuming the movie is 6 hours long. The whole point of an encode is to ensure the quality is practically the same, without killing your HDD space at the same time. As far as I know, lossy audio codecs aren't really an option when quality is still the primary priority. Let arguments of AC3/DTS/FLAC ensue...Quote:
Originally Posted by kukushka
Inception.2010.1080p.BluRay.DTS.x264-DiRTY
well the point is to have the quality of full iso Bluray file at the same size of endcoded version.
Here is the source and encoded versions stats
Inception 2010 BluRay 1080p VC1 DTS-HD MA5.1-greyfeeling@CHDBits
Disc Size: 42,490,360,107 bytes
Protection: AACS
BD-Java: Yes
BDInfo: 0.5.3
PLAYLIST REPORT:
Name: 00100.MPLS
Length: 2:28:07 (h:m:s)
Size: 34,998,478,848 bytes
Total Bitrate: 31.50 Mbps
Video:
Codec Bitrate Description
----- ------- -----------
VC-1 Video 24014 kbps 1080p / 23.976 fps / 16:9 / Advanced Profile 3
Audio:
Codec Language Bitrate Description
----- -------- ------- -----------
DTS-HD Master Audio English 3689 kbps 5.1 / 48 kHz / 3689 kbps / 24-bit (DTS Core: 5.1 / 48 kHz / 1509 kbps / 24-bit)
RELEASE.NAME...: [email protected]
RUN.TIME.......: 2:28:07 (h:mm:ss)
VIDEO.CODEC....: MPEG-4 AVC@High Profile L4.1, 24.000/1.001 fps
BIT.RATE.......: [email protected], 17.0G
RESOLUTION.....: 1920 x 800, 2.400 : 1
AUDIO1.........: English DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 @ 3689 kbps
AUDIO2.........: Mandarin Dolby Digital Audio 5.1 @ 448 Kbps 国配
CHAPTERS.......: YES
SUBTiTLES......: 英简繁体SUP字幕
RIP.SOURCE.....: Inception 2010 Blu-ray 1080p VC-1 DTS-HD MA 5.1-CtrlHD
ENCODER........: HiSido@beAst
Size...........: 17.05 GB
As as pointed out by ringhunter it saves space on the hard drive.
it's extra ~2.3 giga comparing to core dts for _inception_, more than 1/8 of the total encode size, try to do some maths :) _imo_ losses of video quality in encoding are comparable to losses occuring while extracting the core from hd audio stream, not mentioning that i don't think that a good %% of folks have a proper hardware (including their ears) to enjoy hd audio. and if the quality is the primary priority, all this lossy reencode business don't have nothing to do with it, imo again ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringhunterEven on a long movie, the audio would probably come to about to 2gb, and that's assuming the movie is 6 hours long. The whole point of an encode is to ensure the quality is practically the same, without killing your HDD space at the same time. As far as I know, lossy audio codecs aren't really an option when quality is still the primary priority. Let arguments of AC3/DTS/FLAC ensue...Quote:
Originally Posted by kukushka
Correct which is why I laughed it off earlier on in this thread about how people would rather follow groups than quality. If they were truly interested in quality, they would get the source. At the same time, an 11.25% increase in the file size is hardly a compelling reason to give up having the highest quality audio possible; especially when movies are as much a visual medium as they are an auditory one. Try to do some logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by kukushka
;)
EDIT: While most people have the hardware, they all end up watching their movies in shitty acoustic environments, on a 40" panel 20 feet away. Those are the kinds of people that argue about how useless it is to have good audio. Especially with a speaker system setup the audio is extremely dependent on other factors other than the quality of the audio itself. When most people position themselves the wrong way, par exemple on a recliner in the corner of a room, then of course they will think that the quality of the audio makes no difference. You have to take into consideration the fact that not all people have retarded setups to watch their favorite movies of choice.
I am getting now DTS.2Audio.x264.CHD