>download 170GB of The Wire. >use ffmpeg to just convert it to x265. >15GB total

>download 170GB of The Wire
>use ffmpeg to just convert it to x265
>15GB total
why seeders don't care for their storage space?

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    RARBG... my beloved.... 🙁

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Maybe not for such an extreme compression, but for more modest ones that cost of electricity to perform the encoding might actually surpass the cost of enough gigabytes to store the original download on a new hard drive...

      1337x (and other trackers, I'm sure) have more or less that same stuff RARBG had for most current shows, plus some re-encodes that aren't straight web-dl stuff. It's not as cleanly categorized and structured, though...

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I use M1 Macbook Air

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          larp

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >1337x
        man it's not the same... you get random users and just have to hope they wont just use up their reputation to get you to download some keylogger. RARBG had a trusted elite.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >you get random users and just have to hope they wont just use up their reputation to get you to download some keylogger.
          How is this an actual issue? Are you talking about downloading software, or just movies and tv shows? I've seen one download that included a sketchy .exe file in the folder on 1337x in the 4+ years I've been using it to download tv shows, and I can't believe someone expecting a video file is stupid enough to launch an .exe by mistake

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        where mah boi ion10 at??

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >why seeders don't care for their storage space?
    you wouldn't get it since you're not a seeder (not white).
    /thread

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I do this with religious lectures. I also optimize my photos. I have no idea why this isnt a thing.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Reencodes of reencodes ruin quality more than just reencodes. Ideally, it should be done by those who have remuxes and know how to do that.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I notice zero difference

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I never seed and i never will.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      nice gif tbh

      Yeah you can and if you don't have the space or want for lossless bluray rips you can still download a 800mb reencode that probably has the same quality as 2005 era DVDs.

      DVDs can contain FullHD content in decent quality, you simply need the right software.

      Cope, you tech illiterate moronic and annoying loud n00bs.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >DVDs can contain FullHD content in decent quality if you just use them as data storage for your rips
        Yeah no shit, however that's not what is usually meant when someone says 'dvd quality'
        You knew this and still posted that

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          not him, but your posts suggests there's simply no room for anything in between a 2005-era dvd rip and a bluray remux
          which is just nonsense, bluray uses a limited subset of what even H.264 can do, and nowadays there is plenty of room for improving the bitrate with minimal loss in quality
          and if you don't mind losing the noise/grain as well, then there's massive gains to be had, since that's the most expensive thing to encode
          there's also a whole subjective side to this as well, in addition to how people use the videos
          like do you need a remux to play a movie on your 13" laptop? probably not, some people even watch video on their phones nowadays
          while i do appreciate that you can fit a lot of video in its' original remuxed state on modern hdd's, it doesn't mean we should forego efficiency
          this isn't much different to people arguing for bloated electron programs or similar, because you have enough ram, right? who cares? just buy a better computer
          i keep remuxes of stuff i really like, i don't get "mini encodes", either, but there's plenty in between where "pretty much visually identical" while being 5x smaller just means i can store more of other things, i may have dozens of terabytes of storage, but i have other things to store besides video

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Can you explain what a REMUX is ?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It means re-multiplexed. As the other Anon said, it's the raw video and audio contained on the disc, just put in a container such as mkv

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Oh yeah? And how much "decent quality" content at what bitrate can you fit in <4.7GB?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          the fact you even mention bitrate while specifying a file size limit tells me you don't know much about this

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >well um you mentioned bitrate when discussing DIGITAL VIDEO so ur wrong k

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >worse codec for visual quality than h264
    yeah im sure your shitty encodes are so much better

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I don't notice the difference, and even if I did decreasing the size by almost 90% makes up for it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Worth it for the smaller files. It's why I'll take mp3 over something like flac any day.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >mp3 over flac
        use opus, aac or vorbis you fricking moron

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >aac or vorbis
          These won't be any better at higher bitrates, just basically the same.
          >opus
          If space is an actual concern opus can get you higher quality at lower bitrates.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          aac all day everyday. mp3 is still fine, but aac is so much better and will never have compat issues

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It's not really any better unless you are trying to take advantage of it's features for lower bitrates. Especially HE-AAC.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >It's why I'll take mp3 over something like flac any day.
        I can understand the argument for video files but audio? Seriously? How many tracks do you have? Are you still using your 20 year old HDD with 100GB?
        Do you compress your 50KB meme jpgs as well to save a few KB?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          For me, it's just that PCM is largely useless unless you're archiving.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            But if you can get the best possible quality with no real effort, why not just do that?
            It's not like it takes up that much space or saves any time when you rip CDs yourself.
            If you use a higher lossless FLAC compression the file size difference is even lower.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Because I can't tell a lossless from a lossy file to begin with

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You can if you have decent headphones, it also depends on the quality of the original recording/mastering. But even if you don't, maybe some day you'll have the kind of equipment where you can hear a difference and then you will be pissed about your mp3 stuff.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not saying there isn't a (literal) difference, it's just that when I want to watch a tv episode, I'm not doing an ABX test. mp3 320, aac 192 and opus 128 are fine for me

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      codec for visual quality than h264
      this is cope for people with shitty PCs that struggle to decode x265. compare same bitrate and you will see if you're not blind

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    For tv series, Why don't people edit the title credits and them songs into a different video. There's literally 2-5min of each episode that are duplicates.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      some people do that with anime, mkv even supports this properly (as in in such a way where playing the video has the op and ed as if they aren't split)

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >mkv even supports this properly
        never heard of it

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          ordered chapters, aka segment linking

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's not worth losing compatibility with EVERYTHING that isn't a computer just to shave 50-200MB per file.
      Storage is ridiculously cheap and just keeps getting cheaper

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        while few things support the ability to have split mkv's play if it they were one file, it really doesn't matter much, most people watch the intro once, and the credits never, so really splitting them even as independent files is still doing yourself a favour, you don't need to skip them

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      part of why plex's intro/credit detect feature is so GOAT

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    no one that enjoys the art form of cinema would compress their videos.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      No a single person?

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    we're at a point where it's cheaper to just throw another hdd at it. also, if there is nothing wrong with (i'm going to assume avc) the current encode, why touch it?

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I like good quality encodes not slop with no grain retention.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    what would the ffmpeg version of microfische be?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      -vf "scale=iw*.04:-1"
      would this make it 4% of the input scale

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I have a ton of bluray mkv files, some are x264, others x265. How low of a filesize can I expect to get them down to without loss in quality? They are anywhere from 15-80gb in size each.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      depends on the length and the bitrate that'll be determined but you can easily expect the files to be under 1GB.without losing anything in terms of quality.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >40GB file compressed to <1GB
        >No loss in quality

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          It's anime, not nature docs or space footage.
          The intended level of detail is a 24" television with 720p res, seen from 6 feet away.
          You won't miss anything don't worry.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >anime
            gtfo

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            OP didn't specify what it was, which leads me to believe it's anime blurays or porn, neither of which have a particular problem with downsizing.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >not thinking its trannime
            do yuo know where you are

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            This is so sad. To be a prisoner of sorcery and then to pridefully boast about it.

            [...]

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            All those meds are fricking her heart and digestive system which is fricking her sleep which is fricking her mental health.

            It's a self perpetuating demon.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The trick is to drop the resolution and watch it on a crt, looks amazing.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      it depends greatly on the content, as well as what you consider acceptable quality
      the wire is very grainy, so unless you intend to denoise it, they will be relatively large

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Good taste.
    I wonder if zoomers know about The Wire...

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      i'm 33 and only heard of it a couple years ago, haven't watched it yet but i did download it
      to be fair it doesn't look like something a 12 year old would have been interested it

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's easily one of the best tv series ever made.
        They literally had a course on it at Harvard.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        ywn be mcnulty

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Some people have working eyes and screens larger than 6 inches

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >why seeders don't care for their storage space?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >ESL
      >not EAASL
      Open your mouth and insert your foot.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        plenty of initialisms omit words like as/a/and/is/for, etc
        like "CDC" is "Centre for Disease Control", as an example
        sometimes you even have two letters from one word, like AWOL is Abset WithOut Leave
        it's really up the discretion of whoever made the initialism

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Abset
          EAASL

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            drat!

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >why seeders don't care for their storage space?

            more like hyocrit rat

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You don't make conjunctions, prepositions and articles into letters in the acronym, you fricking moron; that's what a child does.
        Fricks sake this isn't just an ESL thread, but a moron thread to boot. Go back to /t/.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >>why seeders don't care for their storage space?
      what's wrong with that?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        the proper order in english is
        "why don't seeders care for"

        why seeders don't sounds like a finnish speaker who's not really fluent

        t. finnic

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Your Name
    The netflix live action adaption is looking great.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >why doesn't everyone transcode into dogshit for absolutely no reason
    Why is nuIQfy full of moronic kids who are stuck in 2005 for storage?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      i used to be able to fit a bunch of movies on my 80GB hdd in 2005
      nowadays you can download single movies bigger than that

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Oh, you could fit a ton of 480p low bitrate movies on a puny hard drive? And you expect 1080p+ higher quality videos to take up the same amount of space? Are you still using an 80GB hard drive or just autistic?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah you can and if you don't have the space or want for lossless bluray rips you can still download a 800mb reencode that probably has the same quality as 2005 era DVDs.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          do you ever get tired of entering threads about things you don't like just to shit them up?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Do you ever get tired of being an absolute moron?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Do you ever get tired of demanding the world cater to your arrested development?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You still can download ~2gb reencodes of movies (YTS and others have it). The quality is decent enough if you don't care too much. No need is absolutely no need to download full a BD remux.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          some people do that, but yts encodes look like shit, and i tend to watch the remuxes, and only much later i compress down stuff i've seen but don't want to delete

          Can you explain what a REMUX is ?

          a remux is the video, audio and subtitle tracks taken from a dvd or bluray, and stored in a new container, typically as a single file
          they differ from a transcode or rip in that they do not alter any of the stream content, they are the exact same quality (and size) as the source

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Seeders may not be as concerned about storage space for several reasons. They might have ample storage capacity, prioritize sharing content over conserving space, or believe in the value of providing high-quality, original files. Additionally, some seeders may not be aware of or choose not to use more efficient compression methods like x265, which can significantly reduce file sizes with minimal loss in quality. The culture of sharing within the seeding community often emphasizes availability and choice, allowing others to decide how to manage their own storage and file preferences.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      thank you, chat-gpt, very helpful

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    x265? What is this, 2008? There are better things available:

    [...]

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      only people who do not have mordern intel cpu do not enjoy this moment

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    quality is more important

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How much did you spend in electricity to do that?

    Serious question

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      50w/h

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >The Wire
    wtf are you doing
    it is worse than a soap opera
    don't fall for the peer pressure, prestige shows suck

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      ???
      The Wire?
      Are you fricking trolling or what...
      I don't even really like that many shows, maybe it's because The Wire is just that much better and ruined me for television.

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    tranime runs at like 3-4fps from the studio
    you can compress it down to almost nothing, just leave high quality audio

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Black fatigue, cant wtch

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's a fair concern
      It was written by white people though, so even if the language is gibberish actual Black person behaviour is very rare

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >written by American author and former police reporter David Simon

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's a fair concern
      It was written by white people though, so even if the language is gibberish actual Black person behaviour is very rare

      I think one of the most interesting parts of the show is how on one hand it was meant to demonstrate just how bad/fricked up things were in the 90s, but here we are and things have just gotten worse in many ways.

      >written by American author and former police reporter David Simon

      What is he wrong about though? It's based on his own experiences living in that violent shithole.
      I feel like he wanted to say there are deep cultural issues that need to be addressed asap before things get worse.
      But ofc no one did shit and instead everyone doubled down and embarrassed and glorified some of the most destructive parts of those cultures.

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    See that's your problem, you want it to be one way but it's the other way.

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >>>use ffmpeg to just convert it to x265
    lol

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why didn't you download them in h265 in the first place, dumbass

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >170GB
    The show is 240GB x264 with a decent video bitrate and DTS. At least use a halfway decent source for your encodes you moron.

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    As you can see by this thread everyone disagrees about what codec to use. That's why seeders just seed the high bitrate stuff and let you compress it to whatever you want. Same with flac: going from flac to mp3 to opus or aac is fine but going from mp3 to aac or opus will be a mess. So it makes more sense just to seed the "source" file so people can compress it however they want

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Marlo did nothing wrong

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Kima is one of the dumbest frickers in the series and her suffering is deserved .
    Also OP you will encounter side characters that can carry thier own show something lost in modern television.

  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >>x265
    >camera pans
    >background smears

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      nah that's normal for 24fps trash

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >he thinks that's caused by the objectively superior codec and not by the motion blur inherent in a camera capturing at such a low framerate

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *