Just get the BR iso.
Encodes are for the poor...
Or for 1 watch then delete,but not for archiving thats for sure
AAARGH!
BT Rep: +1
Just get the BR iso.
Encodes are for the poor...
Or for 1 watch then delete,but not for archiving thats for sure
Last edited by becomehokage; 11-26-2010 at 12:05 PM.
Im kay
Poster
BT Rep: +25
[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
Last edited by Shinzen; 11-26-2010 at 06:20 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Poster
BT Rep: +14
never understood, what's the point of screwing the video while leaving the huge bitrate audio track untouchedOriginally Posted by Shinzen
FST Crew
BT Rep: +1
Because encoders are autistic.
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music"
sprclfrglstcxpldcs
BT Rep: +3
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...
Ellipses go here.
Inception.2010.1080p.BluRay.DTS.x264-DiRTY
Poster
BT Rep: +25
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.
Poster
BT Rep: +14
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
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...
Last edited by kukushka; 11-27-2010 at 06:02 PM.
sprclfrglstcxpldcs
BT Rep: +3
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.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
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.
Last edited by Quarterquack; 11-27-2010 at 07:39 PM.
Ellipses go here.
I am getting now DTS.2Audio.x264.CHD
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
_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 
Bookmarks