Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: a1605fld + higher bitrate :)
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 11:18:55 -0800
From: PeggLeg <reply@here.net>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.multimedia.cooking
Message-ID: <020220161118554094%reply@here.net>
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> <2hq1bb11vl8dh9s9n2ikdc80bd9u1dtm2v@news.giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Thoth/1.7.2 (Carbon/OS X)
Lines: 94
Organization: Unlimited download news at news.astraweb.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: fe5969ab.news.astraweb.com
X-Trace: DXC=eXUjn?>o8=_1IA2mQNenURL?0kYOcDh@Z^G]EfjQUJ5WFY`X_Y8OYWRYW`b<nHDbgTB^EE=hf_6QW=]X2LjTScG]d1Z^joT1m<QM9;=YQ?IIM[
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1788859276
X-Received-Bytes: 6085
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.multimedia.cooking:4635
Yup!
PeggLeg
In article <2hq1bb11vl8dh9s9n2ikdc80bd9u1dtm2v@news.giganews.com>, Herb
Thymebaum <Herb@GardinersGrove.com> wrote:
> 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 |
|