Cad
scientia potentia est
- 24,498
- 45,439
They're not in America. Obviously this would have happened already if they were.
Torrents
- Thread starter Malt_sl
- Start date
darkmiasma
Trakanon Raider
- 823
- 585
Yeah, I need to get off of IPT and get an invite to somewhere else ... unfortunately, all I have are IPT invites, so that doesn't help too much.
galgor
Bronze Knight of the Realm
- 128
- 16
Passthepopcorn is amazing for movies. The invite system for most existing users is closed. However, several trackers have recruitment through their power user forums. For TV, BTN is my poison of choice. Same story. Check the invite forums on other trackers.
Check around. They're both incredible, and worth the effort.
I'm really liking x264.me for movies. It doesn't have as much content as other sites, but what's there is good quality. It seems like half the torrents on the site are free leech, too, which makes it easy as hell to maintain a decent ratio.
For stuff that's not on x264, I'm using HDbits. Great site - if you get offered an invite, take it as quick as you can.
For stuff that's not on x264, I'm using HDbits. Great site - if you get offered an invite, take it as quick as you can.
Jysin
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,278
- 4,035
TVTorrents system is great. I use them for anything TV related.
As far as IPT is concerned, I always download 1080p blu-ray rips so I have specific uploaders that I go to time and time again based on their quality and reliability. I dont bother with any others.
Void
Experiencer
- 9,463
- 11,151
I just looked through the What.CD invite forum again, and any of you that have access to that (still not sure what the requirements are, as I've had it for years) should grab a bunch of invites there. I saw BTN, PTN, HD-Bits, x264.me, PassThePopcorn, MMA Tracker...tons of sites. BTN in particular is impossible to get an invite for, so I'd grab it if you can, even if just as a backup.
Void
Experiencer
- 9,463
- 11,151
Anyone that is using CuteFTP to transfer stuff ever have it hang consistently at 99%? I've got the "folder sync" set up like darkmiasma mentioned earlier, and it will work fine at times, but then it gets in a rut where it just can't finish a file. I have it doing the 8-part multi transfer as described, so it will split it into 7 .tmp files and the main file name. When it works correctly you can watch it combine the .tmp files one at a time and delete them, and see the real file get bigger each time. When it hangs like this though, it looks like everything is finished, it just doesn't combine all the .tmp files. Then my transfer will just sit there into infinity waiting for something to happen. Unless I manually stop and restart it, it will never finish.
I also have messed around with various settings to see if I can fix it, including having it overwrite if the file is smaller, but then it will apparently see it as smaller every single time, and overwrite it, and then eventually it will get stuck in that never finish mode, even if the original file was perfect before overwriting.
It was working great at first when I just told it to skip everything, so I went back to that, and it still doesn't work right. I don't know if it is the fact that I have substantially more to go through each time, or what. Really getting frustrated, particularly when it decides to re-download something like an 11GB Star Trek: Into Darkness file 5 fucking times. Fortunately I don't have any bandwidth limits, but it is still annoying because it fucks up any other internet-ing I was going to do (porn/netflix).
If anyone has any ideas I'd be eternally grateful. I understand rsync is another option, but I'm guessing I'll probably need assistance getting that set up because it is all linux shit I believe. And I'm linux retarded.
I also have messed around with various settings to see if I can fix it, including having it overwrite if the file is smaller, but then it will apparently see it as smaller every single time, and overwrite it, and then eventually it will get stuck in that never finish mode, even if the original file was perfect before overwriting.
It was working great at first when I just told it to skip everything, so I went back to that, and it still doesn't work right. I don't know if it is the fact that I have substantially more to go through each time, or what. Really getting frustrated, particularly when it decides to re-download something like an 11GB Star Trek: Into Darkness file 5 fucking times. Fortunately I don't have any bandwidth limits, but it is still annoying because it fucks up any other internet-ing I was going to do (porn/netflix).
If anyone has any ideas I'd be eternally grateful. I understand rsync is another option, but I'm guessing I'll probably need assistance getting that set up because it is all linux shit I believe. And I'm linux retarded.
Ossoi
Tranny Chaser
- 16,065
- 7,911
I had a HDBits account but got banned after a housemate raped my ratio on the living room PC....he was using it to download HD Simpons episodes, so yep, ruined my ratio on the best HD content private tracker by downloading stuff that really offers little improvement in higher resolutions
Void
Experiencer
- 9,463
- 11,151
Question for people that know more about this than I do.
I've decided that since I pretty much replaced my entire book, music, and comic collection with digital versions of everything I own, I wouldn't mind doing the same with my old DVD collection. Typically I download everything in 720p because I don't see much difference, but honestly if I clear out a bunch of porn I'd have more than enough room for thousands of 1080p rips, and if one day I own a 4K TV maybe I'll actually see a difference. Sort of like how I bought all those DVDs and now want them in higher resolution.
I am a big fan of the x264 .mkv rips, so I'll be going with those, but I'm always a little bit uncertain of the audio format. I typically aim for DTS if it is available, but grab AC3 if that's all there is. However, I really don't know why other than that I read somewhere that DTS is better, and they aren't really much different in size. Sometimes there are DD5.1 rips as well. Those seem to be twice the size though. I'm fine with a bunch of 10-15GB rips, but 20+ seems like it is getting a bit excessive.
I have a receiver that should play just about everything (newish Yamaha), and play it all through XBMC on an HTPC w/ HDMI, so I believe that any format (even those I might not be aware of) would play for me. My question is, what is the best "bang for the buck" in terms of size and quality? In all honesty I probably won't ever notice much difference due to living in an apartment, but future-proofing and all that. Should I stick with DTS, or is it really worth it to up the file size for DD5.1?
I know a lot of people will say that 720p is fine (and it is, that's 90% of what I've watched for the last few years), or that Xvid is fine, or any sound is fine, etc. In general, yes you're right. But I'm talking about creating a collection that I'll hold onto for years that is better than 720p but less than full blu-ray ISOs, that would be worthy of playing in, for example, Eomer's home theater setup.
Thanks in advance for any help.
I've decided that since I pretty much replaced my entire book, music, and comic collection with digital versions of everything I own, I wouldn't mind doing the same with my old DVD collection. Typically I download everything in 720p because I don't see much difference, but honestly if I clear out a bunch of porn I'd have more than enough room for thousands of 1080p rips, and if one day I own a 4K TV maybe I'll actually see a difference. Sort of like how I bought all those DVDs and now want them in higher resolution.
I am a big fan of the x264 .mkv rips, so I'll be going with those, but I'm always a little bit uncertain of the audio format. I typically aim for DTS if it is available, but grab AC3 if that's all there is. However, I really don't know why other than that I read somewhere that DTS is better, and they aren't really much different in size. Sometimes there are DD5.1 rips as well. Those seem to be twice the size though. I'm fine with a bunch of 10-15GB rips, but 20+ seems like it is getting a bit excessive.
I have a receiver that should play just about everything (newish Yamaha), and play it all through XBMC on an HTPC w/ HDMI, so I believe that any format (even those I might not be aware of) would play for me. My question is, what is the best "bang for the buck" in terms of size and quality? In all honesty I probably won't ever notice much difference due to living in an apartment, but future-proofing and all that. Should I stick with DTS, or is it really worth it to up the file size for DD5.1?
I know a lot of people will say that 720p is fine (and it is, that's 90% of what I've watched for the last few years), or that Xvid is fine, or any sound is fine, etc. In general, yes you're right. But I'm talking about creating a collection that I'll hold onto for years that is better than 720p but less than full blu-ray ISOs, that would be worthy of playing in, for example, Eomer's home theater setup.
Thanks in advance for any help.
Err, I'm pretty sure DD5.1 is the same thing as AC3 (Dolby Digital). I don't understand why the filesize would be so different, unless the movies have been encoded at a significantly higher video bitrate (a lossless audio track should only be, at most, 2-3gb bigger than a lossy track encoded in ac3/dts).
Personally, I don't have the audio equipment needed to do DTS-HD etc. justice, so I stick to DTS and AC3. They're both fine for my needs. I don't notice much of a difference in sound quality between the two.
Personally, I don't have the audio equipment needed to do DTS-HD etc. justice, so I stick to DTS and AC3. They're both fine for my needs. I don't notice much of a difference in sound quality between the two.
darkmiasma
Trakanon Raider
- 823
- 585
DTS is usually a higher bitrate, and heavier on the bass. I prefer DTS/DTS-HD to DD5.1, but I take either ... AC3-6 channel is my last resort for movies.
I was also grabbing the 720p versions for a long time ... I recently started snagging the 1080p, but I rarely see the difference ... it does look a bit cleaner, but I'm really just limiting it to movies I really want to look perfect lately. (Marvel Movies, Fast & Furious, Pixar stuff).
I'm in the same boat with storage ... I have 5 * 2TB drives in a RAID 5 on my NAS, so after formatting and parity, I have about 7.5GB of storage, and I could free up a lot of room if I deleted the porn. I have about 500 movies right now, but I think I'm going to delete some shitty movies and replace some lower quality (pre-DVD/Blu-ray stuff with better versions).
For my money, I'd say 720p with DD5.1/AC3 6-channel for one time viewing and 1080p DTS for stuff want to keep/showoff.
I was also grabbing the 720p versions for a long time ... I recently started snagging the 1080p, but I rarely see the difference ... it does look a bit cleaner, but I'm really just limiting it to movies I really want to look perfect lately. (Marvel Movies, Fast & Furious, Pixar stuff).
I'm in the same boat with storage ... I have 5 * 2TB drives in a RAID 5 on my NAS, so after formatting and parity, I have about 7.5GB of storage, and I could free up a lot of room if I deleted the porn. I have about 500 movies right now, but I think I'm going to delete some shitty movies and replace some lower quality (pre-DVD/Blu-ray stuff with better versions).
For my money, I'd say 720p with DD5.1/AC3 6-channel for one time viewing and 1080p DTS for stuff want to keep/showoff.
Void
Experiencer
- 9,463
- 11,151
Ok, I was sort of leaning towards DTS anyway. Interesting that those DD5.1 files are so much bigger.
Here are the technical specs for a 1080p rip of Spider-Man 2002 which comes to a file size of just over 20GB:
On the topic of storage space, I have an 8-bay RAID (expandable with 5x2 more bays if I want to spend the money) with 3TB drives in each, so I've got the space, I will just need to one day clear out all of those huge freeleech porn siterips that I downloaded and got massive upload/point credit on IPT, but never look at.
EDIT: NM, I'm guessing that the "2 Pass" bitrate thing probably caused the huge file size in the first one? If so, what the hell is that, and do I need it?
Here are the technical specs for a 1080p rip of Spider-Man 2002 which comes to a file size of just over 20GB:
For comparison, here's an 11GB rip of World War Z in DTS-ES, whatever that is (Google tells me it is just DTS with an extra rear center channel, hence "6.1"):
Now, I get that due to the aspect ratio there is less actual video in the second one, but I doubt it is enough to make that much difference, and from my untrained eye it sure looks like the sound on the second one would be better than the first one (thus taking more space). Is it just lack of any attempt at compression in the first one perhaps? I really don't get why one would be so much bigger given those specs, but then again that's why I'm asking.Duration.......: 2h 3mn
Encode size...: 11.2 GiB
Video Bitrate..: 11500 Kbps
Codec..........:[email protected]/* <![CDATA[ */!function(t,e,r,n,c,a,p){try{t=document.currentScript||function(){for(t=document.getElementsByTagName('script'),e=t.length;e--if(t[e].getAttribute('data-cfhash'))return t[e]}();if(t&&(c=t.previousSibling)){p=t.parentNode;if(a=c.getAttribute('data-cfemail')){for(e='',r='0x'+a.substr(0,2)|0,n=2;a.length-n;n+=2)e+='%'+('0'+('0x'+a.substr(n,2)^r).toString(16)).slice(-2);p.replaceChild(document.createTextNode(decodeURIComponent(e)),c)}p.removeChild(t)}}catch(u){}}()/* ]]> */(r2345)
Resolution.....: 1920x800
Aspect Ratio...: 2.40:1
Frame Rate.....: 23.976 fps
Format.........: Matroska
Audio #1
Codec..........: DTS-ES
Bitrate........: 1510 Kbps
Channel(s).....: 6.1 ch
Title..........: Main Movie
On the topic of storage space, I have an 8-bay RAID (expandable with 5x2 more bays if I want to spend the money) with 3TB drives in each, so I've got the space, I will just need to one day clear out all of those huge freeleech porn siterips that I downloaded and got massive upload/point credit on IPT, but never look at.
EDIT: NM, I'm guessing that the "2 Pass" bitrate thing probably caused the huge file size in the first one? If so, what the hell is that, and do I need it?
The spider-man rip has a significantly higher video bitrate, which is why the file size is bigger.
See.
Bitrate: 23500 kbps (2-pass) -- Video Bitrate..: 11500 Kbps
Every second of video from the spider-man rip will take up 23mb~ of space, while every second of video from the WWZ rip will take up 11.5~mb.
Now, while the audio bitrate on the DTS track is higher, it's still less than 1gb extra in terms of file size.
Codec: Dolby Digital 5.1 @ 640 kbps -- Codec..........: DTS-ES / Bitrate........: 1510 Kbps
The main difference between the two is the video bitrate, which is more than twice as high for the Spiderman rip.
Generally, when it comes to compressing video, higher bitrates lead to be better video quality. Blu-rays do look better than 720p rips, for example, because they have significantly higher bitrates. There's definitely diminishing returns, though, where adding more bitrate doesn't make a hugely noticeable difference. I personally think that's around the 11,000 - 13,000kbs mark for a 1080p flick. Folks with sharper eyes than mine may disagree.
It's also important to remember that screen size and viewing distance makes a huge difference, too. On my 50" plasma, 720p and 1080p look virtually identical at normal viewing distances. However, on my cousin's 120" projector, it's possible to see the difference between blu-rays and 1080p mkvs.
See.
Bitrate: 23500 kbps (2-pass) -- Video Bitrate..: 11500 Kbps
Every second of video from the spider-man rip will take up 23mb~ of space, while every second of video from the WWZ rip will take up 11.5~mb.
Now, while the audio bitrate on the DTS track is higher, it's still less than 1gb extra in terms of file size.
Codec: Dolby Digital 5.1 @ 640 kbps -- Codec..........: DTS-ES / Bitrate........: 1510 Kbps
The main difference between the two is the video bitrate, which is more than twice as high for the Spiderman rip.
Generally, when it comes to compressing video, higher bitrates lead to be better video quality. Blu-rays do look better than 720p rips, for example, because they have significantly higher bitrates. There's definitely diminishing returns, though, where adding more bitrate doesn't make a hugely noticeable difference. I personally think that's around the 11,000 - 13,000kbs mark for a 1080p flick. Folks with sharper eyes than mine may disagree.
It's also important to remember that screen size and viewing distance makes a huge difference, too. On my 50" plasma, 720p and 1080p look virtually identical at normal viewing distances. However, on my cousin's 120" projector, it's possible to see the difference between blu-rays and 1080p mkvs.
Void
Experiencer
- 9,463
- 11,151
Ok thanks. I caught that about the video bitrate probably as you were posting, but I appreciate the explanation to let me know if I actually need it. Which I have the feeling I don't. I cannot really see myself ever having something bigger than say an 80" TV in the next 10 years (doubtful I'd go that high even), so it seems like all that extra bitrate isn't doing much but taking up space on my drives.
Thanks for the help!
Thanks for the help!
