Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 12:27:28 -0600
From: Herb Thymebaum <Herb@GardinersGrove.com>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.multimedia.cooking
Subject: Re: a1605fld + higher bitrate :)
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 12:26:29 -0600
Message-ID: <2hq1bb11vl8dh9s9n2ikdc80bd9u1dtm2v@news.giganews.com>
References: <3fqqab9ni5q6ith4ckadh5nivchkt334lu@4ax.com> <4KadnSfcG-jWPjDLnZ2dnUU7-eOdnZ2d@giganews.com> <30asab5lhmnffr44fpao2nk1rgrdqrn0d4@4ax.com> <310120161909403502%reply@here.net> <u1evab9hboi3f1iinqrr9bluq1fg2pf04r@4ax.com> <010220161534073808%reply@here.net> <2016020117045816807-@news.giganews.com> <ia60bb550vdsv1gqgv9jeccma0mh62l7a7@4ax.com> <2016020119165216807-@news.giganews.com> <010220162342202609%reply@here.net>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 160202-0, 02/02/2016), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 87
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-JIUAe7URVeTURBif5oQxLW7VsZi02luo4r6t+txGCMfpS+F3wn51C9zTFSUEzqiovb0D/JMNVTyEo8Q!HBOt1YVkA4HtDuNMVwllApYEkPWlR9g/RD319vaW6lZzHqhz+RMTgvRU7ndzpHZpjd5alkH5IB4A!BtI7QMXMzQ==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5936
X-Received-Body-CRC: 4254660134
X-Received-Bytes: 6189
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.multimedia.cooking:4634
On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 23:42:20 -0800, PeggLeg <reply@here.net> wrote:
>(I HAD to cut some of that out...now were using the bandwidth!!)
>I have the mid-speed ADSL and it takes a half an hour or so to d/l one
>of SNSs 700MB posts. And...SNS!...that is NOT a complaint. It is worth
>it. And Geoff: That was me again that mentioned the TV in the kitchen.
>It seems we are pleading two different causes: You seem to be talking
>about preserving these for the future and I am talking about using them
>as cooking aids. If we want to preserve them for the future, usenet is
>NOT the way to do it. Get in touch with the folks that make these vids
>and have them save them on a high res archive (Blu-Ray or whatever is
>best). Certainly not a download from usenet.
>Griff: I thought I had it bad. You may have a slow internet, but after
>30 years of sailing up and down the west coast, going mostly into
>Ketchikan and Drift River (Kenai) as well as Valdez, I can honestly say
>that you live in one of the most beautiful places in th U.S.! I loved
>going up to Alaska.
>Again, SNS: Do whatever is best for you. And Thanks for all.
>
>PeggLeg
>
>In article <2016020119165216807-@news.giganews.com>, Griff wrote:
>
>> > Still many will regret the lower bitrates in the future.
>> >
>> > BTW yet another person noted TV in the kitchen. Once again I do not
>> > have TV in my kitchen. Is that the only place some folks watch food
>> > related TV? If so do they only watch travel shows in their
>> > automobiles?
>> >
>> > Stutor my friend. I implore you to think about the future preservation
>> > and offer bitrates as you did with the first s16e05 aka S16e03. Huge
>> > thanks again for your effort.
>> >
>> > I these shows were on blu-ray I'd buy them in a second. As stutor said
>> > 2 years back his uploads look better as they are higher-resolution.
>>
>> I have the "fast" DSL package ... with nothing else using the
>> bandwidth, my DL speed is 75-100 kB/second. If my wife or I are
>> reading CNN, the speed drops to about 45-60 kB/second. If we're both
>> trying to read CNN, it drops even farther, as well as the CNN page
>> loads taking longer.
>>
>> For that reason, I generally prefer to buy the DVD, even if they are
>> starting to go the way of 8-track tapes and Betamax.
There's a time and a place for everything, no doubt. I'm not sure that
the place for highest video quality is in a cooking show.
As to going with the 'latest and greatest', I'm mindful of several
other groups here on usenet where a poster wants everyone to go with
the new 4K technology, and wants everyone to start uploading all their
material in the new x265 technology, so that super high quality videos
are about 1/5 the size of x264 files; taking a 1080p file from 2.5 gig
to 400-500 meg. Since there aren't any hardware devices that currently
implement x265, he's encouraging everyone on Usenet to buy a new
Android player which will incorporate those codecs. Maybe he has stock
in the Android device market, I don't know. "Are You using the latest
technology?" he admonishes posters.
May be the wave of the future, and in all likelihood, x265 will become
the new standard, just as x264 MKV's have pushed .avi off the scene,
and are doing likewise with mp4's. But, I don't think that Now is the
time, requiring the vast majority of Usenet video downloaders to have
to buy a new device to use them.
And, likewise, I'm not sure that cooking shows are the place to
demand BluRay quality files. OK, Bridget Lancaster gives me the hots
too; but getting to see her in 4K on the 20 foot wide screen thirty
years from now when I review these 2016 episodes is not really all
that important. Getting to watch the steps for creating the dish is
what's important, and, quite frankly, I can do that even with a
640x480 .avi. While a lot of programming merits 1080p for the 96" 4K
monitor, 720p for the size screen you might have in your kitchen
(certainly 32" or less, probably more like 24") or for your tablet is
more than adequate. If you can't learn the steps via a 720p file on
your 16" tablet, having them in 1080P or 4K won't help you much.
Leave 1080p for Godzilla or Law and Order episodes.
Herb
>>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
|