|
[ Create New Post ]
|
|||||
|
[#42659]
Written by: heifer2 [25/06/07, 04:31] Action: [ Reply ] [ Quote ] |
|||||
|
Does this one look better than BlueTV's HR release of 4x01? edit: yes it does. |
|||||
|
[#42704]
Written by: Wolf04 [25/06/07, 14:18] Action: [ Reply ] [ Quote ] |
|||||
| Is this version worth getting over the normal HDTV one? | |||||
|
[#42724]
Written by: paradox [25/06/07, 18:12] Action: [ Reply ] [ Quote ] |
|||||
|
Yes, it's nowhere near as bad as last weeks BlueTV release. Not quite CTU quality however. Whereas last weeks was atrocious this weeks is acceptable. |
|||||
|
[#42746]
Written by: death734 [25/06/07, 22:11] Action: [ Reply ] [ Quote ] |
|||||
|
well last weeks was 28.6 minutes. this is 25.8 minutes ctu doesn't do these shows but does 20.5min at 350mb and 700mb at 42min so do the math file size in kb / runtime in min / 60 * 8 - 384 = video bitrate video bitrate * 1000 / fps / width / height = bits/pixel |
|||||
|
[#42760]
Written by: paradox [25/06/07, 23:32] Action: [ Reply ] [ Quote ] |
|||||
|
I'm well aware how bitrate is calculated. It was a general reference to the image quality of last weeks BlueTV compared to the general image quality of CTU HR releases. Last week's BlueTV had absolutely shocking image quality and was not related to the bitrate. I've seen plenty of Entourage HR's close to 30mins and nothing as poor and pixelated as this. Something clearly went wrong in the encoding process. It's perfectly possible to make a 28min HR without anywhere near as poor image quality as last weeks BlueTV. |
|||||
|
[#42828]
Written by: death734 [26/06/07, 13:32] Action: [ Reply ] [ Quote ] |
|||||
|
ok, but still, i wouldn't expect the quality of of 21/42min hr's with 24-28 min 350mb rips of entourage |
|||||
|
[ Create New Post ]
|
|||||