I usually go for 720p to 1080p, as my monitor is at 1080p. I wouldn't really compromise quality further. But even if I had a 4k screen, I probably wouldn't go for 4k cuz downloads take too long. What I'm saying is I like balance
this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2024
106 points (85.8% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
52731 readers
548 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
💰 Please help cover server costs.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I don't often go for the full 4K Blu-ray Remux releases, since they're massive and I can't really tell the difference over a 10-15GB rip, at least visually. Just a webrip is fine, depending on the source. Plus even my nVidia Shield Pro struggles with them at times.
I'm totally fine with something like 540p or 480p, although I guess that's because my preference is good ol' TV shows that aired in the 90s or 00s over TV cable, so I'm fine with SDTV quality. And honestly, there's not much sense in downloading all seasons of, say, Ally McBeal in 4K when you can download 8 full glorious 90s shows with their entire seasons in SDTV in the same space.
Even with "modern" stuff, I've seldom found a movie or TV show post 2012 that merits anything higher than 720p. I don't get why don't movie codecs get a multi-res options so that for example you can get the action scenes in 1080p, even 60fps if you want, but the melancholic scenes and the quiet drama scenes and the credits in 480p. Would save lots of space without losing quality where it matters.
I tend to notice the drop in quality in more slow scenes since there is more time to notice it. Though very action heavy scenes do suffer if the encode is bad. It would be really nice if we did see more shit in 60fps though. I understand what lots of "but 24fps is more 'cinematic'" mean for some kinds of shots/movies. But after being so adjusted to 60fps and higher (even if shit is interpolated due to having had a "120Hrz" TV since like 09), shit is much much cleaner. The "soap opera effect" is a real thing, but it kind of just stops being an issue after you get used to it and see the benefits of clarity and smoothness. And it is much more like how seeing shit in real life.
I have been having a real hard time going back to watch movies and especially animated media. Like a panning shot in an anime just looks so damn jittery. It completely takes me out of the thing I am watching as it can make me feel a weird kind of nauseous. Lots of regular movies and shows also do this. Some of it might be due to some stuff that was shot in early digital making it worse. But it does happen with stuff shot on film too.
Just really sucks that the industries seem to go out of their way to make it hard for studios/film makers to try weird shit now that we have it. Like I would love to have the 44fps version of The Hobbit since I missed being able to see it in theatres. But the home releases are all set to traditional speeds. It isn't a limitation of the Blu-rays themselves from what I understand. But the players tend to only allow 24/30fps for playback. Though I would love to be wrong about that. But still just artificial shit stopping potential advancements (or at least fun efforts to try shit). Those Spiderverse movies being done in layers of different fps rates is an example of trying some weird shit that was dope.
After like 5-10 years of ripping 4K Blu-rays without re-encoding, I just can’t go back. The only time I’ll go back to anything less is if the source material was shot in it.
Maybe you're not noticing the difference between 720p to 1080p is due to the decoding used. The rips with a lower file size often get there by means of compression, and some uploaders (such as YIFY) heavily compress the videos to where I don't even notice much of a difference, however I'm going to assume you're not downloading the 3GB (average size for HQ) 1080p film.
Then again eyesight plays a role along with display.
I wouldn't bother with 4K usually, however once I upgraded to a 1440 monitor downscaling from 4K actually provides a fair bump in overall sharpness and detail (some films more than others), however the file size is usually over 10GB per film.
I usually take BDRAW, transcode by myself. Or the best quality I can find. Does it look better? Not really. Just the data hoarder inside kicked in. 720p is totally fine.
If it is a cartoon, or even anime, I don't mind between 720p and 1080p in most cases, but that is just about that.
5mbps is high in my book, i used to download 1080p stuff and games on an adsl network and trust me I WISHED that shit could reach 5mbps ! Most of my pirate life i'd have miraculous spikes at 1mbps and i still always went for 1080p stuff or if I can't find it in that quality 720. To me when i watch something i want to enjoy it to the fullest so i don't even bother with lower quality, i don't have 4k hardware so i don't bother with that.
(I've enjoyed fiber connection for a year or two and i always get surprised by the speed of it lmao)
I prefer them as well but if I want to keep something I usually encode to 576p I still don't really see any difference on my displays and it's just something I've been doing since I first tried encoding for the Sony Vita.
I cant say I care as much as I used to, since encoding has gotten quite good, but I have also gotten better at seeing (aka. worse at being distracted by) compression artifacts so while I am less of a perfect remux rip supremacist, I'm also more sensitive to bad encodes so its a double edged sword.
I still seek out the highest quality versions of things that I personally care about, but I don't seek those out for absolutely everything like I used to. I recently saved 12TB running a slight compression pass on my non-4k movie library, turning (for example) a 30gb 1080p Bluray Remux into a 20gb H265 high bitrate encode, which made more room for more full fat 4K bluray files for things I care about, and the few 1080p full remuxes I want to keep for rarities and things that arent as good from the 4k releases or the ones where the 4k release was drastically different (like the LOTR 4k's having poor dynamic range and the colours being changed for the Matrix etc), which I may encode in the future to save more space again. I know I can compress an 80gb UHD bluray file down to 60gb with zero noticeable loss, thats as far as I need to go, I don't need to go down to 10gigs like some release groups try to do, and at that level of compression you might as well be at 1080p.
I cant go as low as a low bitrate 720p movie these days as I'm very close to a large screen so they tend to look quite poor, soft edges, banded gradients, motion artifacts, poor sound etc. but if I were on a smaller screen or watching movies on a phone like I used to, I probably wouldn't care as much.
Another side to my choice to compress is that I have about 10 active Plex clients at the moment and previously they were mostly getting transcoded feeds (mostly from remux sources) but now most of them are getting a better quality encode (slow CPU encode VS fast GPU stream) direct to their screens, so while I've compressed a decent chunk of the library, my clients are getting better quality feeds from it.
You aren't alone. I prefer 360 or 480 p
Because:
- It's faster and not much difference I still get the content/knowledge
- It reduces my carbon footprint
I usually opt for 720p for movies and SD for shows. They're good enough for me and I can store way more. The other thing is the devices and screens are dated now so at some point in the future I'll probably want to get it all again at better quality but for now it does the job.
Where do you live that only has 5mbps? It must be somewhere really remote.