porco556
Jan 2003
 Registered
|
quote: Originally posted by Redemption1980
While i agree with what u mean in principle, since we dont have the Retail DVD to compare it to every time, the i think we have to review it on how it looks, not whether its Untouched or not, as we dont know if the NFO is correct or not.
SVCD's and XVID's are judged on the quality of the pic, so if the Retail DVD is poor then they will be even worse, so will a DVDR if it has to be re-encoded, and might get a poor score, even though its no fault of the group.
Ive saw excelent Downsampled DVD's getting a 8 and poor quality Untouched get a 10, even though the downsampled one looked better, I dont think thats a fair system, we shouldn't have to know if it Untouched or not to judge it, and im sure load of people read the NFO, see Untouched, 5.1 and give out 10/10 scores, even though they dont have even a sample.
Rant over
Hehe... You are also correct also in principle. Good point too when you mention we don't have the retail to compare to. And even if we did, only a very small select few would actually pay money to rent it when they have the "rip" already. And the ironic part is, when a movie is re-encoded, I gripe on flaws that I find out later are in the retail too (ie: The Incredibles for example).
I guess this is the 4th time it has come up in this forum (different threads, different people... can't remember them off hand)... Never any real solutions either. I guess everyone should just continue what they're doing I actually may start griping on these untouched videos a bit more (especially since I heard Spanglish ain't too hot for untouched, and Christmas with the Kranks' colors looked washed out too [like a early 90's movie]).
8/10 Video 
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|