|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » too many download choices... |
| 1-20 of 20 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 03-07-10 12:47am - 5178 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Bletch (0)
Active User Posts: 9 Registered: Sep 14, '07 Location: UK |
too many download choices... Hi guys I joined one site recently and have downloaded lots of phots, but now I've entered the video download sectio and am not sure which is the best quality type to go for (highest res??) I know WMV is a Windows Media file but what about AVI? QT must be for Quicktime I guess. Which download type would you opt for?. Cheers :) WMV (1280x720 731mb) WMV (852x480 355mb) AVI (960x540 739mb) QT (960x540 377mb) | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 01:18am - 5178 days | #2 | |
|
exotics4me (0)
Active User  Posts: 664 Registered: Jan 12, '07 Location: USA |
It depends on a couple of factors. Is hard drive space a concern? I usually prefer WMV and would take the 852x480 if hard drive space is an issue. If it isn't then I would take WMV 1280x720. On the file differences, WMV is easily used with I think all media players. AVI can be viewed with DIVX player or one of the better multi-platform media players like Media Player Classic or my choice, VLC Media Player. QT is Quicktime, Apple's media player, it will work on a PC. You can also watch Quicktime in VLC and Media Player Classic. WMV is probably the most practical if you use a PC since Windows Media Player is usually included unless you removed it. My first time I jacked off, I thought I'd invented it. I looked down at my sloppy handful of junk and thought, This is going to make me rich. - Chuck Palahniuk | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 02:12am - 5178 days | #3 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
At least some DivX avi files will play in Windows Media Player, too. That's handy since you don't have to open yet another app to view vids. And yes, some sites have gobs of video options. It's like going through the typical "hyperchoice" menu at an American family restaurant ... though the comparison breaks down pretty fast after that. I mean there's Denny's ... and then there's Denys DeFrancesco. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 03:23am - 5178 days | #4 | |
|
Bletch (0)
Active User Posts: 9 Registered: Sep 14, '07 Location: UK |
Cheers guys :) I've started to download the WMV 1280x720 versions. Hard disc space isn't a problem right now :) I guess the AVI files would have been okay too though as I've got the VCL player. No Quicktime though. I thought my 2 year old PC might struggle with a 1280x720 file but it's doing okay so far. | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 06:50am - 5178 days | #5 | |
|
Reg Berkeley (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 22 Registered: Apr 01, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
We were 100% WMV from '06 to '08. At that time, I always thought that WMV videos had a very, very faint dullness to them. Almost a matte. Most know that I'm a fanboy of H.264 now. But for your site in question, I would investigate that AVI some more. It will also be more compatible if you're burning DVDs for TV use. The file sizes are close (indicating similar compression). Keep in mind, that the screen sizes are just the default viewing area. It has no bearing on the video quality...just the encoding does. Take the Pepsi challenge on the WMV and AVI...I'd be curious about your results. | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 07:54am - 5178 days | #6 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
One factor not mentioned yet is burning to DVD for umm backup. I have done that to make a portable I can take with me when all I have is aDVD tv to use. WMV I found converts best for dvd conversion. Depending on your software it can turn out real nice. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 08:32am - 5178 days | #7 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I like multiple download options for 2 very important reasons. The file size will be different and therefore will take more or less space on my drives. The other reason is of greater concern because bigger files sizes means more alloted free download space from my ISP provider. The advent of more and more content in HD is killing my possible download opportunities. I try to balance the quality with the size of the files. I have 100GIG of free alloted download from my ISP. It doesn't take long to reach the maximum with files that are near or above 1G. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 09:18am - 5178 days | #8 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Boy, that download limit sucks, Pat. I am glad that my ISP hasn't gone that route. | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 12:03pm - 5177 days | #9 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Good lord! Limitless downloads are your right (uh, aren't they?)! I hope that's per week or around that time frame. If it's monthly I would be shit out of luck pretty quickly. : ( "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 12:25pm - 5177 days | #10 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I would like to say that choice is good but in the case of download options it can be a little pointless. For one thing, most of the file types are widely compatible with both Macs and PCs. WMVs can take a little while to convert on a Mac but this usually just means you can't open and skip forward; you either watch it in real time or wait a minute or so and skip to the end (I wanna know if that dude ever gets his pizza delivered!). Not to sound like a broken record but I would say that bigger is better if the video was originally recorded in a large resolution like true HD instead of SD which is significantly smaller and should not be wide-screen. If it's a DVD site then anything above 720x480 (NTSC) or 720x576 (PAL) will just be an upscaled file and not really any better quality. But when it's HD I want it big--like 1920x1080 if possible--and I want it uncut (did that last sentence sound really dirty to anyone?). File size is another issue, but I figure if I want to keep my special video of _____doing____with her______and_____ (insert your own filthy fantasies here) for years to come then I better choose a quality format and worry about storage space later. And even though they do take up more space I am a sucker for complete videos; there is nothing more irritating than downloading a video only to open it a few months later to discover that it's only a part of a video. I know members have complained about fluff and padding in long videos but I hate to miss out on the, uh, fireworks show if you will because I downloaded the wrong part. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 01:00pm - 5177 days | #11 | |
|
exotics4me (0)
Active User Posts: 664 Registered: Jan 12, '07 Location: USA |
That's interesting Reg. Doesn't a higher default size mean more pixels so when stretched to full screen it doesn't create blurriness? My monitor goes up to 1920x1080. I've never noticed a huge difference in encoding, for example, my lower encoded Viv Thomas videos from Teen Dreams don't show a huge difference in quality loss compared to the same clips from his site. Both are 640x480, but the TD ones have sub-1000 bitrates, while the ones from his site are 2500+ bitrates. There is a subtle difference, more so it seems in the smoothness of the playback, but the files from his site are 3-4 times larger in filesize than the TD ones. We've been trying to get to the bottom of video quality differences since the earliest discussions here. I've had the option to download the H.264 files on several sites, but I was under the impression those were for portable players. I'll have to try a few of those out. My first time I jacked off, I thought I'd invented it. I looked down at my sloppy handful of junk and thought, This is going to make me rich. - Chuck Palahniuk | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 01:14pm - 5177 days | #12 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
The 100G download limit is per month without paying surcharges. Let me tell you those extra Gigs above the 100 are a bitch. That's in large part why HD is such a pisser for me. I still remember a 300$ bill from my ISP because I had been very careless. I don't do that anymore. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 02:53pm - 5177 days | #13 | |
|
Reg Berkeley (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 22 Registered: Apr 01, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
H.264 is the standard for cable and satellite transmission. As an FYI, DirecTV broadcasts its HD content at 1.5Mbps. Obviously, that's encoded well enough for most people to not complain. Thus, there's a law of diminishing returns with encoding. As I've said on other posts, over-encoding creates unnecessarily huge files, which maybe be problematic for a guy like Pat32. On the higher default size --- that has nothing to do with the quality of the encoding. It's not like the video has been optimized for that resolution. It's just the native display area. I could take a a 300K video for iPod and encode at 1920 x 1080. It would look like shit when played, but if you sized it down in your player, it would be fine. | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 08:36pm - 5177 days | #14 | |
|
Bletch (0)
Active User Posts: 9 Registered: Sep 14, '07 Location: UK |
I too like Pat have a 100Gb monthly limit (BT, in the UK). There's no way to check when you are reaching this limit, except for the warning email they send just before and then after you go over your allowance. I unfortunately did this for January and was told in their second email that although they wouldn't stop my internet access, my 8Mb speed would be limited to 1Mb speed during peak times for the whole of February :( Thank God it's March! | |
|
||
| 03-08-10 11:50am - 5176 days | #15 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 02:08pm | |
|
||
| 03-08-10 06:16pm - 5176 days | #16 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
In my case, the answer is very simple. It's called a cash grab. When I joined my ISP in 2002. They offered many different levels of speeds and download limits. You could pay less and get some fairly crappy surfing and download speeds or pay more and get faster speeds and higher alloted Gigs. I was a hog in the beginning and my ISP sent me a letter offering to go Ultra-High Speed since I got unlimited download and the fastest speed the network could offer. It was a higher fee but since I had to pay extra for my above alloted gifg then it was worth it. My ISP soon realied that there were many people like me that were downloading larger and larger files. They decided that they would cancel the unlimited and offer 100Gig for people like me. I suspect they make a killing with all the fools that go over their limit. Unlike Bletch who got a warning. I don't, I just get a bill for the extra Gigs. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 03-09-10 10:52am - 5175 days | #17 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
That would make me too uptight when it comes to using the Internet. Is there no competitor you could go to, Pat? | |
|
||
| 03-09-10 07:18pm - 5175 days | #18 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
Not that I'm aware. It's either with the only cable company in Quebec or through a phone company but they have similar restrictions or should I say the same capitalistic requirements. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 03-09-10 07:37pm - 5175 days | #19 | |
|
pornwatcher (0)
Suspended Posts: 51 Registered: Jun 25, '08 Location: US |
Choose the highest resolution if you have the hard disk space for them. As for AVI, it is an older movie format that came before wmv. | |
|
||
| 03-10-10 08:23am - 5175 days | #20 | |
|
Ed2009 (0)
Suspended Webmaster  Posts: 509 Registered: Sep 12, '09 Location: Wales, UK |
I have spent so much time discussing, explaining and comparing video formats with my members. It's made more complicated as the average keeps increasing (both file sizes, quality and resolution), so what was acceptable or desirable last year is outdated and not good enough this year. Then there's the whole compatibility issue. A lot of my members don't like anything which won't play in Windows Media Player. I've learnt the hard way not to get into the whole codecs and wrappers debate. I try to keep the resolution/quality options down to just two choices. In my experience offering half a dozen or more options causes a lot of customer e-mails requesting advice on which to download. By the way: AVI and WMV are just wrappers, both support a range of codecs with varying degrees of quality and compression. My current weapon of choice is h264 inside an MP4 wrapper. Webmaster of StripGameCentral and A Measure of Curiosity. | |
|
||
| 1-20 of 20 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
