Just ripped a DVD, and it looks better than streaming 1080p videos.

>>62202936
>480p
lol

>>62202936
What is compression?

File: 1504246186308.jpg (32KB, 355x269px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 355x269px

>>62202936
Comparing shitty web players to personal player

File: Underworld_(Extended_Cut_Unrated_Edition)_t00.mkv_20170901_113247.992.jpg (46KB, 852x480px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 852x480px

When will streaming services start to offer videos in decent quality?

>>62202963
480p is actually better than neflix 4k though. How can you even defend streaming services knowing that.

>letterbox
>effectively only 720x360 pixels, literally on par with youtube's 360p
>probably 2:3 telecined garbage

>>62203060
when you provide them with bigger and faster servers to stream uncompressed video and also have a device that can handle that

>>62203107
>Old ass dvd that I decided to rip on my laptop just so I can play it on my desktop
>actually looks 10x better than netflix 4k
Used zero bandwidth too, so why do I even pay for streaming?

>>62203015
You dropped your >

>>62203130
>when you provide them with bigger and faster servers to stream uncompressed video and also have a device that can handle that
Everyone pays a subscription fee, so that should cover it.

>>62203013
>What is compression?
2017. Using so much compression that a dvd rip has better quality. People pay for these services, and they won't even provide a quality experience.

>>62203423
>People pay for these services, and they won't even provide a quality experience.

Oh wow, $10 a month. So much for a poorfag.
You want uncompressed quality then go get an Xbox S, a 4K HDR+ Dolby Vision TV and a 4K bluray movie library. For the rest of us, compressed video streaming is just fine. Hell Netflix is losing money, so it actually means we are paying less than what the service is worth!

>>62203501
>Oh wow, $10 a month. So much for a poorfag.
Implying that here's only one service.
>netflix
>crunchy
>funi
>amazon
>hulu
People could just buy a stack of dvds, and have better quality videos for cheaper than a year with all these snake oil salesmen.
There's really no excuse for it today.

>For the rest of us, compressed video streaming is just fine.
>us
Speak for yourself.

File: ???.png (98KB, 350x270px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 350x270px

>>62203130
>uncompressed video

>>62203620
>People could just buy a stack of dvds, and have better quality videos for cheaper than a year
Maybe if you only watch 5 year and older movies. I just subbed to Netflix less than a month and a half ago. I watched so much stuff, that no way could I have saved by buying them. Also Netflix does have 4K streams, which even compressed will still look better than 1080p.

File: 1489911603078.png (35KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 657x527px

>>62203423
>people pay for shit service despite better quality alternatives being readily available
>LOL WHY DOESN'T NETFLIX BLOW MONEY ON USELESS SHIT THAT DOESN'T MAKE THEM ANY MONEY
Are you really this retarded?

>>62203665
Holy shit, you are fresh off the boat.
Just use torrents. Free and good quality if you know the right trackers. Free and quality varying from good to shit (but still way better than streaming) if you just use rut.

>>62203620
>snake oil salesmen
They arent streaming fraud or false hopes.
They are streaming a service.
How can you possible say its a snake oil operation?

>>62203665
>Also Netflix does have 4K streams, which even compressed will still look better than 1080p
What does this even mean? No Netflix stream can compete with a standard blu-ray.

>>62203710
I used torrents and still do. But it is really nice just to be able to stream what I want on the fly in bed.

Also I've used kodi, but have some trouble with things not loading.

Netflix is just really nice and easy for the price.

>>62202936
>dvd
>good quality
my nutsack has more hairs than your dvd rip has pixels

>>62203739
>What does this even mean?
Well the topic was dvd quality being better than netflix, which implies their normal hd stuff, not their 4k stuff.

>>62203744
>Netflix is just really nice and easy for the price.
>Netflix is just really nice
Lost.

>>62203739
I think hea meant their 'HD', 'FHD' etc don't actually give better viewing experience (since the compression is very shitty) just like snake oil doesn't actually benefit you.

>>62203665
>Also Netflix does have 4K streams, which even compressed will still look better than 1080p.
Sorry for your eyes, because you must be blind.
>>62203683
That's fine. I just unsubscribed, so that's one less chump getting ripped the fuck off.
>>62203710
Torrents, are better sure, but I could just rip the discs that I already bought
>>62203719
>They arent streaming fraud or false hopes.
They are streaming false hopes in quality. When a dvd rip literally gives you a better quality video upscaled than a 4k stream then maybe you're getting ripped off.

>>62203805
>Sorry for your eyes, because you must be blind.
Maybe he meant it looks better than their '1080p'.
>Torrents, are better sure, but I could just rip the discs that I already bought
Nothing wrong with that.

Current year, and streaming services still don't offer good stream quality visually, and the audio quality is even worse. Fuck that bullshit.

File: Matrix dvd.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>62203805
>Sorry for your eyes, because you must be blind.
So, then let us play a game.

Here is a scene from Matrix Revolutions dock battle from a dvd rip.

File: stargate-sg-1.jpg (91KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1280x720px

How should I rip my stargate dvd collection as a good balance between file size and quality?
Handbrake is a given seeing as I'll do it on linux.

File: matrix netflix.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

And here is it from Netflix. I just did this now. I didn't get it down to the split second, but close enough. This is a normal non-4K stream. I don't pay for the extra resolution.

>>62203665
Sure if you only watch 12 movies a year and only buy from the Walmart barging bin of old movies.

>>62203925
I just used full size, printscreen for both. My monitor is 1080p.

>>62203912
>How should I rip my stargate dvd collection as a good balance between file size and quality?
What are you poor? Just remux them.

>>62203744
>what is popcorn time
just go to bed, you're gonna make your parents angry

>>62203895
>>62203912
>>62203914
>So, then let us play a game.
>Uses handbrake
Just die already.

File: capture.png (4KB, 207x110px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 207x110px

>>62203979
>Uses handbrake

No, that's the middle guy posting the stargate pic, not me.

>>62203954
remux? is that a program?
>>62203979
see
>>62204005
What's wrong with handbrake?

>>62204094
Remuxing is putting the raws into a container so you can play it without mounting it but retain lossless quality (well, you lose menus and shit but who needs em?)

File: 1483244290006.jpg (72KB, 553x746px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 553x746px

>>62204128
>dvds
>lossless

File: netflix.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>62203914
Are you saying that netflix is better, or worse, because that image has a shit ton of artifacts on it. Circled is an example, and it looks horrendous overall.

>>62204149
No one is saying that dvds are lossless, or even advocating dvds smartguy.

File: 1stargate-sg-1.jpg (81KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1280x720px

>>62204128
Thanks. Will look into it. I have plenty of time. Don't plan on rewatching it for the sixth time until sometime next year.

>>62203710
>Just use torrents.

Sounds like something a socialist leech would advise...

>>62203968
>just go to bed, you're gonna make your parents angry
When their service is cutoff for pirating?

>>62204357
>leech
Stop projecting, I have average ~4.0 ratio (I try to seed to 1.0).

>>62202936
Popcorn time begins better YouTube or Vimeo even on TN panel.

In general Cinema home fags buy Blu ray for high quaility because pay thousand dollar on home theater

>>62204241
Try makemkv. it's free/paid, and also available on linux.

>>62204400
I tried that a few years ago. Didn't seem to go so well. Don't really recall why.

File: sippy.png (1MB, 1184x1916px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1184x1916px

>>62203914
>Posts pixel vomit.
>Paid to see this.

File: All at Sea.jpg (37KB, 720x576px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 720x576px

>>62204568
>This is what /g/ has become.

>>62204603
4chan has always hated streamfags though.
Nice try rewriting history.

>>62203195
>>62203501

People lust use sites that do it for free :
123movies.net (basicly anything whit 123movies in it or yesmovies)
freemoviesz.to
watchseries.do

>>62203501
>Hell Netflix is losing money, so it actually means we are paying less than what the service is worth!
>netflix is losing money
They just lost a couple more dollars. Maybe they can retain some customers if they provided better quality streams.
>inb4 memelated 4k

If I just want the accessibility of watching a movie and don't want to own the physical copy, but also don't mind the quality drop when you stream, why the fuck would you pay for Netflix then? Just stream it from free sites, it's a fucking victimless crime

>>62204094
>What's wrong with handbrake?
It isn't ffmpeg

Anyone know any good guides on how to take say a 1080p h264 video and either transcoding it to h265 or staying with h264, but reducing it to 720p, but with minimal loss when it comes to high motion scenes? So how to decide on what an "ideal" new bitrate or quality setting is, to get best bang for buck on reducing the quality.

Need to make some more room and I rather not resort to flat out deleting, or resorting to using compressed zips that slow file access a lot.

>>62205323
Just remux, and buy more hdd. Mechanical drives are cheap as fuck now.

>>62205531
>how am I going to explain all these drives to normies when they see them.
I've already got a 5 disk NAS.

But really for comedy shows or non-action movies in general I am OK with even 480p; but I don't want to needlessly over-compress or lose so much bitrate that essentially the quality is technically sub-480p despite there being 480p pixels present.

Seriously speaking, no one cares.

People care about praticality. If the quality is barely decent, that's ok with 99,9% of them.

Just look at how many smart $K TVs are sold to people who only watch 1080p compressed Netflix streams and YIFY from time to time.

File: 1491616793569.jpg (24KB, 295x292px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 295x292px

>>62203130
>uncompressed video

/g/ is fucking hilarious from time to time, holy KEK

File: smuggy_kirino.png (306KB, 593x540px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 593x540px

>>62203423
LOL

>>62203805
>That's fine. I just unsubscribed
Woah, netflix will end up bankrupt if you do this, anon!

>>62203130
>>62203651
>>62205769
samefag

>>62205791
>Woah, netflix will end up bankrupt if you do this, anon!
>>62203501
>netflix is losing money

File: 454t5n.png (7KB, 575x61px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 575x61px

lol

File: ?.jpg (28KB, 720x376px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 720x376px

>>62205820
You tried

File: dumbass.png (7KB, 466x159px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 466x159px

>>62205857
Netflix is losing money, and so is Spotify.
You think they're disappearing anytime soon?

>>62205820
>i'm not retarded, he sure is samefag.
pic related.

>>62205862
>lol
But it's better than streamshit
see
>>62203914

>>62205877
>You think they're disappearing anytime soon?
Yes. They're obsolete as they are now. A lingering remnant of the past.
>pic related.
Dynamic ip. Clever.

>>62205877
>>62205871
Multi device samefaggetry.

File: 1504301805336.gif (524KB, 350x263px) Image search: [Google]

524KB, 350x263px

>>62205928
Nah, they're not. They're literally studied as cases of DIgital Transformation, no random ass faggot in his parent's beasement ripping shitty movies will change that.

>>62202936
What's even worst is Netshit offers many films in abysmal SD quality, when said films are out on BD. So not only are you paying to watch compressed DVD transfers, you're watching DVD when blurays are out. Not even mentioning DRM and data mining

>>62205959
>Nah, they're not. They're literally studied as cases of DIgital Transformation, no random ass faggot in his parent's beasement ripping shitty movies will change that.
They should be making a huge profit then. The only competition is a bunch of neets who upload videos in their spare time.

People in thread is just focusing on netflix' shit ass quality.
Have you all forgotten about the abomination that is Crunchyroll?
>shit for video quality
>shit for audio quality
>Bundled with the most infuriating web based player, and apps in the world.
>fired everyone that even made that shithole tolerable

This is quite interesting tbqh.
DVDs used to be encoded with mpeg2 and are 4.7gb in size. I have no way of calculating the difference in audio size so I'll ignore it since there will be audio in modern video anyway but now that it makes the calculation less accurate.

I'll compare mpeg2 to h264 since it's the most used codec nowadays to. Mpeg2 needs roughly twice the bittrate of h264/for the same visual quality. So if we take 4.7gb you would need a 2.35gb h264 encode to have roughly the same quality. Most encodes I find online are at least this size or higher so it should look the same or better. If we're going to compare to Netflix 4k it uses h265 so it compresses at a 4:1 ratio compared to mpeg2. This would mean it only needs to be 1.175gb in size to reach the same quality. However the bitrate of Netflix is probably higher (don't know for sure since I don't use Netshit) but if I where to look at the screenshots posted here it looks pretty bad. I think there's a lot of bad encodes available nowadays. I have a Crunchyroll subscription and when I pipe an episode to mpv with good filters it looks way better than in the online player. This leads me to believe that DVDs actually are pretty shitty since it only amounts to the same quality a low bittrate modern codec would produce however modern encodes from streaming services are shit as well.

We really need better sources for high bittrate video. Everything seems to be shitty except for bluerays and uhd bluerays.

I have yet so see a single DVDrip whose quality isn't at least half of an actual DVD.

I downloaded DVDrips for years from torrent, from many sources, and even though they looked fine for the time an actual DVD looks FAR better, perhaps at the level of a good BRrip

It probably has something to do with what >>62206146 said

>>62206234
That's why I'm hoarding bluray encodes. HDDs aren't that expensive nowadays.

>>62206234
My dvd/br rips are at least the same quality, and if I'm feeling quite fancy I interpolate them them to 60fps, or more.
DVDs aren't the best quality to begin with, but it is very sad that up-scaling one gives you better a/v than the streaming providers. if you play around with filters, and have a decent size collection then streaming is just a waste.

>>62203912
I've used ogmrip in the past. It's a front end to ffmpeg etc soon you don't have to do hours of googling about best practise cli args every time you want to encode something.

>>62206146
And I dunno but are all blurays nowadays crackable? I hear UHD one's still dont have a public way to crack them.

so buying used uhd blurays doesnt seem viable but normal blurays are?

Always been nervous about it ever since song put rootkits in their dvds

>>62206895
I more or less mentioned it as a potential great source for videos. DRM ruins everything as always. What's new? Luckily normal BD still is a high bittrate source.

>>62203088
576p used in DVDs in the past.

>>62202936
That's because streaming services aim for average bitrates that fit your internet bandwidth (1-4mbps) instead of using a CRF.

To get good file sizes that aren't bloated use a 10-bit x265 encoder and use a CRF of 22 and the faster preset. Also encode audio to 128 vbr Opus.

I dont understand. i get high quality 1080p HD on netflix and foxtel that looks way better than OP's image.

File: ServerCollection.png (114KB, 2458x862px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 2458x862px

Physical media was never dead. However for normies, netflix/youtube and overall streaming is more than good enough.

I have a large collection of Blu-rays and DVDs. Rip/encode them myself with H.264 and the super high quality preset.

>>62207161
OP's image is from a DVD rip. AKA 480p or 360p.

>get DVDs and bluerays for free from library or campus
>rip them and return them
>get amazing quality picture and audio

>>62207235
Can also do something similar. Rent from redbox for $1 per movie and build a collection of new movies that way.

Although Redbox has vastly inferior audio options and quality.

>>62203088
>480p is better than 1080p

File: 00008.m2ts.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>62203895
>>62203914

>>62203914
They both look like shit desu senpai

Yeah. The bitrate on streaming services is garbage. Plebs only look at the resolution. It's 1080p therefore it must be good.

>>62204186
>>62204568
Are you being stupid?
The Netflix one looks much better.
The wall lighted thing is much clearer.
Obviously from the blu-ray.

>>62207382
Actually it's not the bitrate but the fact that ABR mode is being used instead of CRF. A 1GB movie encoded with CRF will have significantly better quality then one encoded with an ABR due to intelligent bitrate distribution.


Companies can't afford to use CRF however because that means the bitrate varies too much which is a problem if you want to target specific bandwidths.

>>62207270
Are all normal blurays rippable? Not uhd

File: bluray.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>62203895
framed it exactly this time. source is from bluray disc

>>62207660
damn i meant framed it toyour netflix screenshot

for comparison:
>>62203914
>>62207660

>>62207617
UHD can technically be played on a PC with the right software and UHD supporting Blu-ray drive.

As for ripping regular blu-rays, yea. 99% of blu-rays can be ripped no problem. I used a paid copy of MakeMKV to break the encryption and rip Blu-rays. Takes about 20-30 minutes per rip writing to an NVME based SSD as scratch space.

Keep in mind that many Blu-rays these days like to put fake entries on the disc. Jon Wick 1 and 2 for instance (and pretty much anything else from Lion's Gate) have 200+ 55GB entries on the disc. Only one of them has the scenes in the proper order. The number of that copy changes from disc to disc. The EU, Redbox, and US version will all have a different number. I usually just type "Movie name MakeMKV" into google. It brings up the MKV forums and someone on there usually know which the right one is.

>>62202936
How do you even properly rip I know it sounds stupid but I just can't find anything that works

>>62207727
I'm the anon from >>62207698

I use makeMKV. It's a program technically still in beta so it's "free". It works for a few weeks before requiring a key, which can be gotten from the devs on their own forums every few weeks. Or one time cost of $35 is what I spent. Think it's $50 now. Program just werks. Also capable of ripping blu-rays

>>62207749
Thanks I will look into it

>>62207383
You're an idiot. How can you look at all that pixelation, and say that it's in anyway superior to anything.
You have to be a full on shill to pretend to not even notice it.

>>62203914
God, this looks fucking horrible.

>>62207749
>>62207698
Would you recommend redbox, or just buying at walmart then selling on ebay? Or buy/sell on ebay?

>>62207161
OP is right. Watching a proper dvd rip/remux looks better on a 1080p screen then watching an online stream from netflix, hulu, and etc.
A dvd at 4k might be a stretch though, but not by much. I beleive that this is the point that the complainers are trying to get across. Netflix/Amazon/Hulu/Vudu streaming video.quality is near identical to a good dvd, and the audio from the dvd is not even in the same league.

>>62207844
Personally I avoid Redbox because the audio is just that much worse. The actual Blu-ray offers 5.1 surround at a high bitrate where as redbox usually only has 2.1 and very low.

I personally buy all my movies from my local FYE store. They offer used prices and such. You can try Amazon if you don't live near an FYE. Amazon has 3rd party sellers as well.

>>62202936
>he expects to get uncompressed blurays streamed
good joke

>>62203157
because you are retarded

>>62207844
Pawnshops, yard sales, and thrift shops are great for dvds, and blu rays. Anime is a different story though as those are a little expensive especially if you want a full series.

>>62202936
>whut is netflix

stop watching animu rips

>>62207952
>uncompressed
Niggas just want decent bitrates. It's not 2005 people even get good speeds on mobile now.

>>62207952
>he expects uncompressed blu-rays

>>62207992
>animu autists still lead the way in the video encoding and playback world
Pretty sad. Why can't normalfags step it up?

>>62207931
And none of the ebay sales are redbox tier?

Thats kinda weird if there's sneaky versioning on the bluray boxes that otherwise look the same, or is there a mark or something to look out for?

>>62208160
The Redbox discs are usually don't have the same disc art as retail versions. And why do you insist on eBay? Just go and buy from Amazon.

>>62208194
Oh damn you are right, I just picked a random case, john wick 2 is $20 on amazon, $16 on ebay, $33 at FYE. Regular bluray not 4K, since thats harder to crack from what I understand, and dont want difficulties.

>>62208245
Yea Blu-ray is only harder to break simply because of lack of availability. UHD players are still uncommon as are PC based UHD capable drives, so there's not much call/need for a bunch of people to work on cracking it.

And yup, just go Amazon. As for buying/re-selling, I just keep all of mine. Fuck it. Nice to always have the physical copy.

>>62208289
If I had the $$$ to keep them I wouldnt be asking about cracking.. but since these are regular movies not porn and such, I may burn them to standard blueray disks and keep them that way instead of putting them on the NAS even though then I cant stream it to myself in another location.

What really prevents any blueray disk from being copied 1:1 to another disk without need for cracking? I assume they use some special cucked disks that wouldnt work right if copied to standard bluray disks bought at the store

>>62202936
it is because normies do not care about quality. they just want to stream their latest meme movies on their shitty phones.

>>62208341
no they use standard discs. It's just that blu-rays are encrypted by default. Cracking simply refers to the ripping program's capability of pushing past said encryption and cells. There's really no way to make a copy of a blu-ray movie unless you play it while using recording software or something and even then you're still limited by the software's encoding.

No matter what, you're looking at a remux at best.

>>62203088
higher resolution will always mean worse video quality on streaming services because the bitrate is too low. most people do not have good enough internet connections for streaming bluray quality movies without lots of buffering.

>>62208392
No, that's not rue. You can rip BDMVs with makemkv.

>>62207727
I use makemkv for the most part, or a certain similar chinese software that uses gpu acceleration, gets through every dvd/bd encryption without issues.

>>62208398
Yeah it's really hard to believe that there are still countries that have slow internet with data caps and use sms

You need to learn about bitrate OP, it could save your life.

>>62207317
>what is bitrate

>>62208392
However it should still be posible to make an 1 on 1 copy of the exact data on the disc and copy it to a new disc right? It would still be encrypted but if you burn it to a new disc a player would still be able to play it.

>>62208480
Technically yes it should be. I'm unsure of what software you'd need to do it

>>62208488
>>62208480
Bytecopy. You're welcome.

Hey guys, what's a good program for extracting the audio from a DVD? Just the audio.

>>62208525
Makemkv and then use ffmpeg to extract the audio track.

>>62208518
Why not just dd? Or doesn't it work for UHD BD?

>>62206234
thats why you download raw rips and not the shitty scene releases made by some pajeet kid in his basement.

>>62208480
Wait. Not bytecopy. Just copy the iso aftrr running through decryption, and burn to disc.

>>62208392
I mean, why cant an exact surface copy of the disk be made?

i mean its not like the original bluray connects online to the studio to authenticate right?

>>62208550
I haven't tried uhd at all, but you can get a 1:1 if you run the disc through handbrake (or similar), and just copy the whole thing. Then you can burn it to disc as a bd.

>>62208603
Arent UHD movies too large for standard BDs?

>>62208611
UHD are the same size as bdxl no, but still I have never rippied a uhd disc at all. UHD is a different ballgame, and to be honest I have no clue.

>>62208544
in ffmpeg how do I specify which audio channel gets extracted?

>>62209041
map, for example, to extract the second audio track only;
ffmpeg -i input.mkv -map 0:a:1 output.ac3
that is, input 0, type 'a'udio, track 1 (second, as it counts from 0)

you can also omit the type, like "0:1" is the second track of the input, also you can omit tracks this way, such as with "-0:v" to omit any video tracks

>>62209096
Many thanks

>>62209104
np, also, while ac3 is common on dvd's, there are a couple other formats available, so check beforehand (such as with ffprobe)
ffmpeg will complain if the output format doesn't support what you're trying to place in it
you can also just output to an mka

>>62208019
well you know, when there's over 9000 animu shoes and mommy only pays for dsl, nature finds a way

>>62202936
>subscribing to netflix
>watching movies
degenerate

>>62203651
What THE FUCK is happening with this filename!

File: Capture.png (3KB, 97x44px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 97x44px

>>62209348
.png

>>62208544
>ffmpeg
Nobody uses that shit.
DGindex or makemkv into gmkvextractgui

>>62209408
>nobody uses ffmpeg
>literally one of the most commonly used libraries for multimedia

>>62209444
Only as a backend. Nobody who does any real work is sitting there typing commands into a CLI.

>>62209469
>being too dumb to type in a simple command
>not knowing the power of scripting
wew lad

>>62204690
Not arguing that, just your newfag pretentiousness of a site born of a underageb& fag. You can got back to other sites to get your credit as an oldfag. Doesn't work here. We all 404 here. Fuck off. Either contribute or go fap. Doesn't matter to me.

>>62209096
>ffmpeg -i input.mkv -map 0:a:1 output.ac3
That command line re-encodes the track using the internal ac3 encoder and default settings (low as fuck bitrate).
If you want to extract the track untouched, you need to add "-c:a copy" before the output file name (-c is codec, :a is to specify audio, and "copy" as codec name means passthrough untouched from source).

>>62210048
my bad, yea, i'm aware of that, i was just showing how to use -map, not thinking the command might be used as-is

>>62208009
you are incredibly naive if you actually believe that any company would bother to offer such a thing, it's a complete waste of money to do so because retards will just go and pay for 4k(tm) to get better quality
and might i remind you that there are tons of people who have datacaps?

>>62210048
>>62210065
This is why nobody uses ffmpeg.

File: [1111] Higurashi no Naku Koro ni 01 [DVDRip 576p Vorbis].mkv_snapshot_01.17_[2016.07.14_16.28.18].jpg (67KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1024x576px

>>62202936
I'm glad I live in a PAL region, 576>480

>>62210318
>Data caps
>2017, and you're on /g/
How does a data cap even happen to you?

>>62210489
it doesn't to me, but i know for a fact that there are many people for whom it is a problem.

>>62202936
>hey mom a 4GB dvd rip looks as good as a 1.5GB 1080p rip!
Magical.

I wouldn't really call 1080p good until ~6GB per hour/13Mbps.
Raw DVD has 5.5 times less pixels and a little less than half the bitrate.

>>62210451
Enjoy your pal speedup :^)

>>62210608
13mbps without audio?

>>62210621
A not shit format 5.1 would only need 128Kbps per channel to be good
You're basically looking at 14Mbps for acceptable 1080p streaming

But 70 million devices streaming that quality is about 1 petabit of capacity. And that's insane.

>>62202936
>>62203060
>>62203088
>>62203195
>>62203423
>>62203719
>>62203866
>>62203895
>>62203912
>>62203914


>what is bitrate


>>62203914

>literally admits to not using the highest quality and netflix has 3 tiers, not just 2 and even within those tiers the bandwidth effects the bitrate which you can't manually set

nice comparison, im sure digital foundry wants to hire you

>>62203157

>he says after bragging about paying for physical media which he then had to rip and then when playing back via VLC has to manually adjust the aspect ratio and crop settings to "trick" VLC into removing the black bars which are hardcoded into the video so that it plays back in true edge-to-edge full screen rather than windowboxed

File: 1479005876572.jpg (5KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 250x250px

>>62210742
>adjust the aspect ratio

>>62210702

>128

bullshit, ive fucked around with streaming on twitch and autistically playing around with settings in xplit and obs

64 bit audio in mono still has zero audio noise

and video is more based on the action most services overbloat the Kbps listed, open up network activity and you'll see 99% of all content is streamed at no more than 1Mb/s at any one time even tho says 3000 or 3500 or 4500kbps

on twitch 3500 was the max at the time but I studied their own sponsored streams and source would be 720p60 at 3500~, 720p30 is half at 1800~ and so on down the line, since film isnt even 30 and far less fast paced than a FPS much less coupled with a ton of colors like leauge of legend you should be streaming 1080p at 3000~

however i have a feeling most of these services are wasting bitrates on the audio portion to play into the fucking autistic physical speaker fags even tho 99% of content is listened to thru headphones

every 100kbps in video bitrate makes a huge difference, audio only needs half of that

>>62210742
>what is bitrate
No shit. The streaming jews needs to up the bitrate for 2014+3 to go along with the price kikery.
>netflix has 3 tiers, not just 2
And all 3 tiers needs to increase the bitrate you dumbfuck. That's pretty much the argument I see here.
>he says after bragging about paying for physical media which he then had to rip and then when playing back via VLC
Nonsense. No one on /g/ uses vlc, and an old disc (dvd mind you) implies that it was lying around available probably purchased many moons ago, and yes upscalling a good dvd is still better than streaming from the luddites who jew down the bitrates.

>>62210767

you have to manually set it so that then when you choose to crop to 16:9 it actually takes out the bars

IIRC you have to manually set the aspect ratio to 4:3 and then crop to 16:9 or the opposite of that

idk cause its been like 10 fucking years since DVDs were relevent and when i already figured this shit out on my own ripping DVDs, then i realized how much fucking time it takes and the stupid lack of benefit-to-time-wasted

also blockbuster still existed in the lower 48 states at the time too

>>62207352
this is the best. what is it?

who are these retards arguing against physical media itt?

>>62202936
Congrats you have learned that resolution is a meme.

Resolution is limited by
>lens sharpness (always forgotten by tech enthusiasts)
>photography (contrast-y images look sharper)
>contrast (via display setting)
>display type
>display size
>encoding

DVDs didn't even get the best out of Standard Definition. Most televisions didn't get the best out of it. You can take a good blu-ray and play it back in 4:3 full-screen crop on a good SD monitor like a Sony BVM in 480i and you'd swear it was HD just because of everything I listed above.

>>62203060
Most people don't give a fuck as long as it's watchable, and companies are going to save on bandwidth by only offering just-good-enough encodes. People can literally download transparent 1080p encodes for free, yet most people choose shitty re-encodes that are bitrate starved and have tin can audio.

>>62210921
You don't see ts in name of his screenshot?

>>62211019
this, i wouldn't even be surprised if they're gauging what people want by looking at the most popular torrents

File: 1459174580141.png (167KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 640x480px

Jeebus, ppl, just get a library card and get free use of all the blu-rays.

>INB4 hurrdurr, but I have to leave my house...

>>62211052
wtf that's a telesync? explain?

File: sam_6343-jpg[1].113511_.jpg (144KB, 576x768px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 576x768px

I'm telling you, technological progress is often a meme. In the 90s you could watch tv on a big black C-band satellite dish that would send you a 40 megabit 704x483i 60hz video feed. The master feed direct from the television camera recording the event with no loss of quality. On things like HBO World Championship Boxing or WWF RAW the image was absolutely crystal clear and in 60 fps.

Back then some people had huge Sony XBR Trinitron CRT televisions with incredible color and contrast. Deep, deep blacks and out of this world color. Back then they didn't fuck around with the color process either like they do now, it was always very natural.

I've watched a shitload of TV and blu-rays on some good HDTVs and monitors, and that also includes later HD CRT tv's. NOTHING has ever looked as good as the video signal off those big satellite dishes running to a 40" SD Trinitron showing boxing on HBO in the early 90s. Some of the 4k setups I've seen have come close. But that just goes back to my point. They knocked people's socks off in the 90s with good images, and they're still doing it today. But if it's supposed to be so good now, why did people think their setups were so good back in the day? Hint: because they were.

>>62211052
dude... are you dumb?

.m2 is a model framework blizzard used in WoW a few expansions ago.

fucking brainlet.

>>62211138
Telesync can be very good these days since there are cheap 4k video cameras out.

>>62211057
I only download the best quality available, so they most likely omit me along with the other high count leechers.

>>62207352
Probably a blu-ray since it is .m2ts

>>62211052
nah you're full of bullshit>>62211155
It's probably a bluray rip>>62211164

>>62211205
I was just responding to his implication that telesync = shitty video. That isn't always the case.

Collecting telesyncs can be pretty cool since they are often the closest thing you'll ever get to the theatrical presentation of the movie.

>>62211158
same, but for every person on a remux torrent, there's 100 more on a 2G rip of a rip

>>62211146
Reminds me that WWE Network is only 30 fps. That could actually be a reason why people aren't into wrestling as much these days. Somehow it seems less "live" at 30 fps and you don't get into it.

>>62204990
handbreak uses ffmpeg retard

>>62202963
Unless you're sitting closer than 2 screen diagonals to your set you literally can't see the difference between SD and HD even with 20/20 vision.

It's a total meme for most people, who tend to sit 10-12 or more feet from the TV.

File: jew6.png (49KB, 409x417px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 409x417px

>>62211146
digital tv added only horrible compression&bitrate and support for subscription cards. it could probably be better than analog if someone wanted but they have no reason to do that so it will always be worse.