AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Related Topics > Fansub Groups

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2006-10-15, 20:55   Link #41
Gunboat Diplomat
Honey Flash!
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Age: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by DryFire View Post
As far as releases are concerned, I already did; a few groups seem to be doing the same.
...and I applaud them. Anything before h.264 is history. Let technology march forward!

Quote:
You don't have to make the files larger, but some people prefer to. I believ most encoders want to be be able to watch their encodes and not have their eyes bleed, the other 90% of people is really a non-issue.
Here's what doesn't make sense. You have this new, more powerful encoding scheme so you take your series and you encode them into... a larger file size than your previous encodings? I mean, your eyes didn't bleed then, did they? It's not good enough that you already got a jump in quality, you have to increase the file size too? Why weren't the previous encodings even bigger?

My point is that if the quality of the previous encodings were good enough, and they must have been since they were released that way (they could have been better quality if that were warranted), then releasing future episodes with the same quality should be okay, too. Doesn't this make sense?

Now, this thread started with fansubbers who made dual releases and I understand that they're going for what they were already doing plus the high quality version for the connoisseurs. However, if you're going to out-right deprecate the old codec for h.264 then why on God's green Earth would you increase the file size too?
Gunboat Diplomat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:03   Link #42
Harukalover
In exile
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: There! Not there! There!
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunboat Diplomat View Post
...and I applaud them. Anything before h.264 is history. Let technology march forward!
But sacrifice a chance at better quality for filesize? If we want small filesize let's all convert to RMVB encodes. The chinese do it, no reason we can't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunboat Diplomat View Post
Here's what doesn't make sense. You have this new, more powerful encoding scheme so you take your series and you encode them into... a larger file size than your previous encodings? I mean, your eyes didn't bleed then, did they? It's not good enough that you already got a jump in quality, you have to increase the file size too? Why weren't the previous encodings even bigger?
... You know it's only really like 50MB we are talking about. It's not like we are all releasing 400MB H264 encodes. Takes like what 10-20 minutes more to download?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunboat Diplomat View Post
My point is that if the quality of the previous encodings were good enough, and they must have been since they were released that way (they could have been better quality if that were warranted), then releasing future episodes with the same quality should be okay, too. Doesn't this make sense?
They weren't great. They were just good enough.

Sorry but some of us like quality. So we aim for quality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunboat Diplomat View Post
However, if you're going to out-right deprecate the old codec for h.264 then why on God's green Earth would you increase the file size too?
Cause I don't like when my eyes bleed from bad videos... :/
__________________
"Brainpower without willpower is no power."
Harukalover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:03   Link #43
bayoab
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
The OP has a point. As I've said multiple times. All the encoders claim that it produces better compression, then why aren't we explicitly seeing this better compression? Instead they produce a "high quality" encode that is larger and more CPU intensive and has a higher resolution for something which did not have this higher resolution to begin with. Then again, is it really higher quality?

I'd love to see someone attempt the following experiment:
Grab a random scene from some random show or grab a raw from one of those 5 minute shows, but nothing where either codec clearly has an advantage over the other. Encode both scenes with the same target size relative to a 175mb encode with no special features*. Then release them with the XVID one labeled H.264 and vice versa. Let's see how many people still claim the true H.264 one is better quality.

*No special features = nothing that will give away which is the xvid encode just from attempting to decode it like b-frames.
bayoab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:03   Link #44
Bot1
The Supreme Pontiff
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
with the increase in storage capabilites and overall bandwith speeds releases were bound to get bigger at some point it just so happened that that jump came at the same time as a new codec
__________________

AKA Malakith
Bot1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:15   Link #45
Gunboat Diplomat
Honey Flash!
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Age: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harukalover View Post
/me wonders when somebody asked for large filesizes with no gain...?
If you really want to know where this came from, here's the sequence of comments, with excerpts for brevity:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harukalover View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunboat Diplomat View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bot1 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunboat Diplomat View Post
...if you have two movies that appear to be of equal quality but one was smaller than the other, wouldn't you take the smaller one?
i really think that you put that we there too easily. its fine that you have an opinion but don't think that we all want smallers filesizes just because you do.
If you want a larger file size with no gain associated with it, that's just out of some bizarre personal neurosis...
/me wonders when somebody asked for large filesizes with no gain...?
I claimed that if two files looked the same then people will choose the smaller one. Bot1 disagrees and says that that's just my opinion. Therefore, he's implying that there are people who would take the larger movie file with no gain. Do you understand where this came from, now?

Quote:
Anyway as I said before. I always aim for best quality in my H264 encode. If I don't do a dual release (XviD encode as well) then I try to aim for a middle ground for quality and size.

Only reason my H264 encode would be smaller then a XviD encode I do would be because the show easily compresses.

And so far I see no reason to change that just because two people want smaller files.
If it were just two people who wanted smaller files and everyone else wanted larger ones then fine; so be it.

However, ask yourself this: When you do a single release, why do you go for "a middle ground?" Why not just "aim for best quality?"
Gunboat Diplomat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:25   Link #46
Harukalover
In exile
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: There! Not there! There!
Age: 26
You said "appears". Now depending on your eyes it could look exactly the same or you can notice differences. Some of us can notice those differences. Unless you have some reference file you can point to (Where there's a large difference in size but no difference in quality) then that argument is flawed. Since it's only an opinion at that point.

Why I go for a middle ground you ask? Well simple... my group usually makes me do so. In the end it's hard to convince a leader of a group that for the single release the size will be 250MB. I usually try not to let other staff members influence what I do in an encode but I do bend slightly. (Once they start asking for stupid stuff like H264 in AVI I freak out).

Anyway to end this pitiful debate. I'll say this... For my encodes, I decide filesize. I decide the codecs I use. I decided the container I use. I don't change that for the viewers. I may change for my fellow staff but not for the viewers. If you don't like it... well I suggest taking some time to learn a bit and start encoding for fansub groups yourself. Then you can release 90MB encodes all you want.

And no I don't pick high filesizes out of nowhere and plan it just to hurt people who have less space on HDD or a crappy connection. I do it (After testing compressibility) cause it's the most pleasing to my eyes and to hopefully my viewers as well. I aim to give them the best product possible. Not the smallest product possible.
__________________
"Brainpower without willpower is no power."

Last edited by Harukalover; 2006-10-15 at 21:26. Reason: Forgot something...
Harukalover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:32   Link #47
Farix
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harukalover View Post
But sacrifice a chance at better quality for filesize? If we want small filesize let's all convert to RMVB encodes. The chinese do it, no reason we can't.
You are just engaging in hyperbole now.

Quote:
... You know it's only really like 50MB we are talking about. It's not like we are all releasing 400MB H264 encodes. Takes like what 10-20 minutes more to download?
That's an extra night's download for me.

Quote:
They weren't great. They were just good enough.

Sorry but some of us like quality. So we aim for quality.
And you stick me out in the cold in the process. Still, the quality was just fine as it was. Again, let me remind you that broadband penetration in the US should be an embarrassment. But the FCC along with the telcos, grossly over inflates the numbers to make it look x100 better then it actually is.

Quote:
Cause I don't like when my eyes bleed from bad videos... :/
Do you have actually proof that your eyes bleed or are you engaging in hyperbole again?
Farix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:36   Link #48
Gunboat Diplomat
Honey Flash!
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Age: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harukalover View Post
But sacrifice a chance at better quality for filesize? If we want small filesize let's all convert to RMVB encodes. The chinese do it, no reason we can't.
We don't "do it" because we can do so much better with h.264. Really, I don't understand why RMVB is so popular in some circles. They could increase the image quality whlie maintaining those diminutive file sizes simply by switching to h.264.

Anyway, it might no be so bad if we used h.264 at those file sizes. I would have to check the image quality at that bitrate to really say...

Quote:
... You know it's only really like 50MB we are talking about. It's not like we are all releasing 400MB H264 encodes. Takes like what 10-20 minutes more to download?
I admit that they're not that much bigger. I'm just flabbergasted that they would be bigger at all!

Quote:
They weren't great. They were just good enough.
They were good enough then... but now, suddenly, they're not good enough. What's with that?

Quote:
Sorry but some of us like quality. So we aim for quality.
Look, we all like quality. No one disagrees with that. We only disagree on how much quality we need. I liked what you were doing before and you seem to think you were fucking it up this whole time...

Quote:
Cause I don't like when my eyes bleed from bad videos... :/
So, your eyes were bleeding the entire time, until now?
Gunboat Diplomat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:38   Link #49
Farix
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harukalover View Post
For my encodes, I decide filesize. I decide the codecs I use. I decided the container I use. I don't change that for the viewers. I may change for my fellow staff but not for the viewers. If you don't like it... well I suggest taking some time to learn a bit and start encoding for fansub groups yourself. Then you can release 90MB encodes all you want.

And no I don't pick high filesizes out of nowhere and plan it just to hurt people who have less space on HDD or a crappy connection. I do it (After testing compressibility) cause it's the most pleasing to my eyes and to hopefully my viewers as well. I aim to give them the best product possible. Not the smallest product possible.
Then I guess you and your group wouldn't have any problems if someone took your fansub, reencoded it to a more manageable filesize, and then redistributed it for those of us who are stuck with our "crappy connections". Unlike processing power, "crappy connections" is something that most people have absolutely no control over.

Remember, the reasons that the average XviD's filesize was established at ~170MB was a compromise between quality and manageable filesize. Just because AVC has entered the scene doesn't mean that the reasons for the compromise mysteriously go away and no longer apply. Now if a group would like to release an alternate HD sub for the quality freaks, that's one thing. But the compromise regarding SD encoding should remain enforce.

Last edited by Farix; 2006-10-15 at 21:51. Reason: reduce quote, cleanup grammar, add additional comments
Farix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:48   Link #50
Medalist
Infie
*Fansubber
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Texas
Hm why the term "crappy" It's only slower than those of most. "Crappy" is an adjective is pointless because a connection isn't crappy...it is what you pay for and what you pay for is what it is
Medalist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:51   Link #51
Gunboat Diplomat
Honey Flash!
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Age: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bot1 View Post
with the increase in storage capabilites and overall bandwith speeds releases were bound to get bigger at some point it just so happened that that jump came at the same time as a new codec
Actually that growth came and now it's going!

While bandwidth is increasingly available to more users the load on available bandwidth is also growing and, according to my (and many other) ISP(s), the load is growing faster than available bandwidth.

Storage capabilities are growing but I don't think it's growing faster than available media. There's much more to download now than before so, again, size is becoming more of an issue as time goes on, not less...
Gunboat Diplomat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:57   Link #52
Farix
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uchikatsu View Post
Hm why the term "crappy" It's only slower than those of most. "Crappy" is an adjective is pointless because a connection isn't crappy...it is what you pay for and what you pay for is what it is
I don't think the current parity between broadband and dialup users can be construed as "most" for either side.
Farix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 21:58   Link #53
RaistlinMajere
Now in MHD!
*Fansubber
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
I do 138MB H.264 releases already, and my upcoming stuff will be 110 or so.
__________________
RaistlinMajere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 22:03   Link #54
Harukalover
In exile
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: There! Not there! There!
Age: 26
/me sighs...

You guys act as if there are laws to what a filesize should be. (Remember there's no payments or job specifications in fansubbing, it's for fun) Encoder picks filesize. Don't like it then don't download or encode it yourself. No reason to go further into a pointless debate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Farix View Post
Then I guess you and your group wouldn't have any problems if someone took your fansub, reencoded it to a more manageable filesize, and then redistributed it for those of us who are stuck with our "crappy connections". Unlike processing power, "crappy connections" is something that most people have absolutely no control over.
And this is a threat or something? Remember it's a FANSUB. If someone wanted to take it and release it as there own while it has the exact same script and logo as my group there's nothing I can do about it. Not like I can sue them for stealing my pirated work. If you hate huge filesizes so much then reencode it yourself. And let the encoders pick what they want instead of trying to make them into robots who do everything they do because of fear of "established standards".
__________________
"Brainpower without willpower is no power."

Last edited by Harukalover; 2006-10-15 at 22:09. Reason: Missed something...
Harukalover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 22:08   Link #55
DryFire
Panda Herder
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: A bombed out building in Beruit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunboat Diplomat View Post
Here's what doesn't make sense. You have this new, more powerful encoding scheme so you take your series and you encode them into... a larger file size than your previous encodings?
I know in a few cases of dual releases the xvid is simply a compatability encode (i.e. fit 26/13 per dvd) while the h264 version is meant to be for videophiles.

Also if you gain more quality per mb, increasing the filesizes may be more meaningful.
DryFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 22:11   Link #56
Medalist
Infie
*Fansubber
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Texas
Like me say: "They are accustomed to it" Therefore they abide to that and defend it ( I guess ) --- H264 FILES ARE SO BIG CUZ THEY CAN BE! (got a problem then don't leech h264 content) kthxbye
Medalist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 22:19   Link #57
naka
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
can all the encoders who strive for 'quality' aim at constant quality across all the episodes you ever encode from here on instead of varying quality but with constant file sizes?
naka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 22:21   Link #58
Medalist
Infie
*Fansubber
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Texas
You can't really stop that naka (and i can tell your a ( it rhymes with Screecher) ) But Color and resolution play a rhole in how the quality is no matter what you do...take the color black ...it's easy to see the boxes in it because it's a stand alone color that is being filtered w/ colored pixels ...let's put it like this...It's not constant quality because the world isn't perfect.
Medalist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 22:25   Link #59
Gunboat Diplomat
Honey Flash!
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Age: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harukalover View Post
You said "appears". Now depending on your eyes it could look exactly the same or you can notice differences. Some of us can notice those differences. Unless you have some reference file you can point to (Where there's a large difference in size but no difference in quality) then that argument is flawed. Since it's only an opinion at that point.
It was a gedanken. A hypothetical situation to prove a point with the message recipient. The stipulation was that if he could not tell the difference between the image quality of two files. The hypothetical allows the statement to be true and it was this truth to which Bot1 responded. The point is that file size is always a consideration. There is no flaw in this argument. Ineed, as a trained mathematician, you would be hard-pressed to find flaws in my arguments...

As to the plausibility of two size differing files without noticeable quality differences, you really don't think you can construct one? Take XviD, h.264, and your choice from a world of videos. I think you will see how to find two similarly looking files of different sizes...

Quote:
Why I go for a middle ground you ask? Well simple... my group usually makes me do so. In the end it's hard to convince a leader of a group that for the single release the size will be 250MB. I usually try not to let other staff members influence what I do in an encode but I do bend slightly. (Once they start asking for stupid stuff like H264 in AVI I freak out).
So people on your own fansubbing team feel that file size is a serious consideration. You should consider that...

Quote:
Anyway to end this pitiful debate. I'll say this... For my encodes, I decide filesize. I decide the codecs I use. I decided the container I use. I don't change that for the viewers. I may change for my fellow staff but not for the viewers. If you don't like it... well I suggest taking some time to learn a bit and start encoding for fansub groups yourself. Then you can release 90MB encodes all you want.
You sound as if we are giving you some kind of directive. We (at least, I) am not. I'm merely seeking to understand the motivation behind this decision and I have. Do you approach the other aspects of your life with the same animosity?
Gunboat Diplomat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-10-15, 22:33   Link #60
Gunboat Diplomat
Honey Flash!
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Age: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harukalover View Post
/me sighs...

You guys act as if there are laws to what a filesize should be. (Remember there's no payments or job specifications in fansubbing, it's for fun) Encoder picks filesize. Don't like it then don't download or encode it yourself. No reason to go further into a pointless debate.
I assume you're responding to Farix, specifically. If you are somehow referring to me, I would have to take serious issue with this claim...

By the way, here's a piece of adive that might help your blood pressure. If you don't like a debate then don't enter into it...


Personally, I would understand (and love it) if the h.264 encodings where HD but, sadly, many of them are not. Certainly, not any of the ones that I have seen...
Gunboat Diplomat is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:28.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.