I recently stumbled across a fair collection of 576p movies. Have you guys seen this? It's (or at least can be) almost identical to full res Blu-ray and only 2-3GB. :O
Where can I find more, and why isn't this like EVERYWHERE? :w00t:
Printable View
I recently stumbled across a fair collection of 576p movies. Have you guys seen this? It's (or at least can be) almost identical to full res Blu-ray and only 2-3GB. :O
Where can I find more, and why isn't this like EVERYWHERE? :w00t:
x264 and iTS have plenty, and also PTP. And where did you stumble on those rips?
It was on one of my new sites. Is there a site that has more?
CMCT and CNSCG are heavy 720p but their rips are usually 2-3 GB.
iTS would be the only one to come close to x264 in means of sheer number. SDBits has a few internals along with goem. I'm sure any of the large movie trackers (PtP, TC, etc) would have a good amount.
Chances that MBM has any idea what you are talking about with those acronyms is only slightly less than him getting hit by lightning while simultaneously being run over by a Bricklin being driven by a midget.Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbar
I hope I didn't fall into that category also, figured PtP and TV were thrown around enough to know what they are :PQuote:
Originally Posted by IdolEyes787
/Also, google found those 2 sites from the previous post, both appear to be chinese trackers, not positive since I am not fluent in chinese though
I'm not fluent in English.:idunno:Quote:
Originally Posted by kingeater
Anyway obvious something is lost in translation as a site named CMCT(Classic Movie Compression Team ) is listing Anacondas 4: Trail of Blood under latest movies.:unsure:
I guess they are expecting it to be looked upon as a classic by future generations :P
Only if future generations are deaf and blind.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingeater
iTS has 398 576p encodes, I have no idea what x264 has as not a member thereQuote:
Originally Posted by megabyteme
Appears that they have 808.Quote:
Originally Posted by BurnsyiTS has 398 576p encodes, I have no idea what x264 has as not a member thereQuote:
Originally Posted by megabyteme
it seems very interesting , unfortunately x264 is invite onlyQuote:
Originally Posted by teflon05Appears that they have 808.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burnsy
Question answered. I expected the res to be more common, but I guess it hasn't caught on. Even the sites that do have it, don't have enough to warrant seeking them out.
Thread can be closed. Thanks, to everyone who responded.
The reason is this, imo...
576p is not HD. It is standard definition from a PAL source. 480p being from a NTSC source. Therefore, anyone that has an HD TV would prefer to find a proper HD encode of same movie for just a few GBs more.
The only times I see a true benefit, was if you have a HDTV but your bandwidth was limited and could not download full HD encodes.
Or...
You do not have a HDTV but you have plenty of bandwidth and care about quality.
Or...
The movie is not available in HD and you want the best quality version of it.
If you do not fall into one of these categories, then you have no need 576p. Which equals not as much demand and in turn little supply...
By the way, it doesn't necessarily mean it's from a PAL source, it usually means it's a resize from a Bluray, much like 720p is.Quote:
Originally Posted by bumrocks
I'm on the fence about calling it SD or HD. I would actually call 576p, as they are done from HD sources, HD videos. HD, meaning high definition, are sold on disc in 1080p using a quality retentive codec, and sold online @ 720p using similar codecs. I may be getting literal here and ignoring all sorts of conventions, but I don't see a smaller resolution automatically disqualifying what could easily be considered high definition, unless we're just setting 1280x720 as an arbitrary minimum.
I'm watching on a 102" Da-Lite projection screen with an Epson 8350. It sure looks HD to me. In fact, it's amazing! I also have a 47" Philips upstairs that the details (none, really) are significantly less discernible.
All said, why would anyone want to download an additional 2, 5, 10, or 50 GB when they don't have to? Even if bandwidth is unlimited, I'd rather have a file within 10 minutes than have to wait an hour, 2 hours, 5...
I have a 25Mb/3 MB per second connection. I am allotted 250GB per month on a home connection. Paying additionally for more speed, or more bandwidth just so I can say I have a "pure" HD source is still wasteful, IMO. What is it you aficionados think you are getting for your additional time/money?
EDIT- Think of all the extra crap that is stripped from video games (put there to discourage downloading)- can the same thing not be a deterrent used by the movie studios? It is great to have a fantastic, "pristine" source. After that, is it not wise to efficiently share the same thing but without all of the unnecessary bloated data?