dumwaldo
Jan 2002
Retarded Idiot!
|
napalmfuzz
completely irrelevant point, what i do or don't do i will never admit to. i could be some jerk off that has no clue what he is talking about or i could be a person that encoded releases you have watched. i didnt flame, i offered an explination based on logic and facts, take it for what you want, its up to you.
zcar
my point is that it is not easy to encode, but it is easy to churn out a mega bitrate SVCD. i am not standing on a soapbox and the reason why i and probably nobody will ever help these twits is because rather than ask for help they tell the world that we are wrong and they know better, then they release poor quality encodes. ask any encoder for 3 sites to help learn how to encode and i can GUARANTEE that www.vcdhelp.com is in every encoders list. well head over to www.vcdhelp.com and look over their forum then come back and try to say i dont offer help to noobs, the problem is that SID does not believe they are noobs and they dont understand that you can encode quality SVCD's without knocking the bitrate out of the ballpark.
now i have to back you up on something that you said
quote:
Originally posted by zcar
Any fool looking at this would be able to tell you exactly what the source was
TELECINE
how completely true that statement is. i have no desire to watch this movie but i grabed the sample to see what all the hubub was about and boy was i surprised. there is no way on earth that this is from a DVD.
FACT: DVD's do not have projector noise in the picture.
on top of that quality encodes do not have visible interlacing lines like this release does. so not only is the bitrate to high it is also a mislabel.
now just to illustrate the point i am making with refrences you can relate to let me compare this to another SVCD release that was also bigger than it should have been. look at TCS's release of LOTR and ask yourself if this release from SID is better quality. if you answered no then you agree with what i am saying because not even LOTR used this high of a bitrate.
98 minutes divided by 3 CD's= just under 33 minutes per CD
178 minutes divided by 4 CD's= 44 and one half minutes per CD
i dont know how to explain this any better, i mean would you accept a 2 CD rip of a 44 minute TV show? thats what this release is doing.
how many of you are in school? what would happen if you had to do a 500 word report but turned in a 750 word report instead? you would immediatley fail without even having your report read by the professor because he would immediatley see you are unable to follow the direction given. "the scene" standards may not be perfect but they are in place for a reason. to stretch the standard a little bit is one thing but to go 50% over accaptable limits is just plain foolish. its practically a direct request to fail.
to summarize, this release is mislabeled and obscenley oversized and fair quality at best. it belongs on IRC not FTP sites that are used at the highest level of distribution.
what a sad waste of a source because these people have ego's larger than their brains. SID if you really want to contribute then help a group with real encoders out and pass them your source or spend a little time and figure out how to do it right.
[sarcasm]hey i just had a great idea, since quality is above all the most important thing about a release why dont all the groups just release uncompressed AVI's that run about 300 meg per minute, after all thats really the only way to duplicate the original with no quality loss. so what if a release is 40 or 50 CD's instead of 2, it will be better quality than a 2 CD copy so its a good idea.[sarcasm]
__________________
what the hell do i know, i watch my movies on a 2.2" screen.
"pho est wonderful!" "pho est wonderful!" really, he is
Last edited by dumwaldo on 03-02-2002 at 03:40 PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
02-28-2002 10:29 AM
lol fair points well made
