[blueskyy]

I know that it has been decided that the download section be categorized into x264, XviD, and miniMKV. But for me, a codec is just that, it doesn't define quality. Quality is defined by resolution. And before anybody jump the gun and tell me a 1280x720 image is 720p resolution, you're dead wrong. So my suggestion is, full quality encode go to either the 720p or 480p category; low quality encode go to minimkv category.

720p category are 720p releases, 1080p releases, full quality BDRip, full quality BRRip, etc.

480p category are for 480p releases, full quality DVDRip, full quality BDRip@480p, full-quality BRRip@480p, and odd-ball resolution between 480p and 720p, such as mHD (popularized by the Vietnamese btw).

miniMKV category for lower quality videos, such as rmvb, re-encodes for psp, iphone, and such, and miniMKV (video resolution is reduced, but keeping the image frame size the same).

I know this will not be adopted, especially after all the work that you guys had already done. But this is just what some of know us might be thinking...

[UnknownFact2]

Originally Posted by blueskyy

But for me, a codec is just that, it doesn't define quality. Quality is defined by resolution.

Wrong wrong wrong!!! So fucking wrong!

[Pozputty]

Originally Posted by UnknownFact2

Wrong wrong wrong!!! So fucking wrong!

not entirely wrong...

some containers are definitely superior to others, but it doesnt mean the source was better or the encode was done properly.

**anyways... 480p DVD rips are often better than 720p HD TV rips. higher resolution isnt always the answer. its best if the person who makes the post just lists all the possible information like bakaBT does.

[Duratrix]

Originally Posted by blueskyy

I know that it has been decided that the download section be categorized into x264, XviD, and miniMKV. But for me, a codec is just that, it doesn't define quality. Quality is defined by resolution. And before anybody jump the gun and tell me a 1280x720 image is 720p resolution, you're dead wrong. So my suggestion is, full quality encode go to either the 720p or 480p category; low quality encode go to minimkv category.

720p category are 720p releases, 1080p releases, full quality BDRip, full quality BRRip, etc.

480p category are for 480p releases, full quality DVDRip, full quality BDRip@480p, full-quality BRRip@480p, and odd-ball resolution between 480p and 720p, such as mHD (popularized by the Vietnamese btw).

miniMKV category for lower quality videos, such as rmvb, re-encodes for psp, iphone, and such, and miniMKV (video resolution is reduced, but keeping the image frame size the same).

I know this will not be adopted, especially after all the work that you guys had already done. But this is just what some of know us might be thinking...

Originally Posted by UnknownFact2

Wrong wrong wrong!!! So fucking wrong!

Originally Posted by Pozputty

not entirely wrong...

some containers are definitely superior to others, but it doesnt mean the source was better or the encode was done properly.

**anyways... 480p DVD rips are often better than 720p HD TV rips. higher resolution isnt always the answer. its best if the person who makes the post just lists all the possible information like bakaBT does.

WTF?!

Ok first of all, quality is defined by the encode & resolution. (mainly the encode)
h264 is superior to Xvid and therefore considered higher quality.
A 720p > 400p in terms of quality. (well not all the time)

You can have an Xvid encoded file that's Higher Quality than an h264 encoded file, although the filesize will be bigger. =/

Our system uses both the size & codec to define where to put your stuff.
Containers are containers, they have nothing to do with the actual codec. But mostly Xvid for avi & h264 for .mkv (but it can easily be the other way around).

Want me to prove to you guys that resolution & containers have nothing to do with the quality? ...
It's the encode & quality of the source file that defines the quality!

[ImBored]

^liek he said.. the source is important.. having large file with mkv or Xvid container will just suck if the source suck
Trust me.. i tried changing a 60 mb h264 vid to a >250 mkv vid.. and Ifail

@blueskyy
i think the download section is fine already.. no need to make it more complicated

[Firebird]

h264 > XVid generally speaking yes. DVD 480 > HDTV 720... generally yes. However, those factors alone do not define the quality of the encode. I could quite happily create a really low quality DVD rip with a "regular" filesize. (But that would be a daft thing to do ofc).

Not any single piece of information decides the quality of the end product alone. Maybe it's starved, over-cropped, bandy, grainy or bloated. If you really wanted to have one particular section that said "Hey, this is the top quality release" you'd need something similar to Bakabt where downloads in that category are reviewed before being allowed.

That said, your categories do exactly what they say on the tin. I personally wouldn't have used these categories, but whatever works. It doesn't effect anything I do, I just use search in the same place I did before... only now it searches in all the subforums too.

[purehavoc]

only thing that bugs me is the "h264" why not "H264" or "H.264". it would also be nice to have an "HD" prefix (like the SD) for uploaders who are posting both 1080p & 720p in one thread instead of making 2 threads for one anime.

[Nabz]

ya i think it be better if h264 section was named HD H.264

[jaks]

no O.o , many dvd 480p also use h264 codec , it will get messy if u rename it HD

[Nabz]

than how about Just H.264