this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024

446 points (94.4% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

53948 readers

372 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

💰 Please help cover server costs.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com

sunbrothersco@lemmy.dbzer0.com

dataprolet@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com

RandomLegend@lemmy.dbzer0.com

446

Even in this poorly made comparison shot I made you can tell the difference between streaming and "self hosting" (lemmy.world)

submitted 7 months ago by SpiceDealer@lemmy.world to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

77 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Jack Ryan S3 E3

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] 7u5k3n@lemmy.world 124 points 7 months ago (6 children)

Man... Im watching Stargate sg1 with my kiddo. My Plex server is down for a bit.. so I switched over to prime for an episode or two..

It's dark, it's audio is horrible, it's 4:3 formatted it's horribly compressed and it has commercials.

Talk about a poor viewing experience.

Not watching is better than watching...

[–] Zahille7@lemmy.world 37 points 7 months ago

"it's a strange game. The only way to win is not to play."

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 29 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You shoukd consider cancelling prime, bezos doesn't need more moneys ^^

[–] 7u5k3n@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)

That's super tempting honestly. Idk that it benefits is at this point.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 24 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Stargate was 4:3, so there's that....

[–] Khrux@ttrpg.network 12 points 7 months ago

Yeah I really doubt streaming would change anything to 4:3.

Disney+ famously changed classic Simpsons to 16:9 and in the process, cropped enough to make some visual gags not work, but I can't imagine them preferring 4:3 over 16:9.

[–] crossover@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The worst part is that even buying SG1 on Bluray gives a bad experience, because they fucked up the 5.1 audio.

So what did the pirates do? Combined the Bluray video with the better DVD 5.1 audio! Best of both worlds.

[–] 7u5k3n@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Huh I wondered. That makes a lot of sense.

The version I have looks and sounds so much better than the blurays I have... Tho like you said better audio, widescreen and I'm fairly certain it's been ai upscaled as well. I'd have to go back and look but my physical disks don't hold a candle..

[–] plz1@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago (3 children)

SG1 was shot in 4:3 until like season 8 or so.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 40 points 7 months ago (1 children)

SG-1 was shot in widescreen from day one, on cameras that had framing marks for 4:3 and 16:9. A 4:3 cut was sent to TV networks and a 16:9 cut was canned until the show was released on DVD.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

SG1 was shot in film and mastered in 16:9. 16mm in the first 3 seasons, 35mm 3-7, and then they moved to digital HD cameras season 8 onwards.

Many shows from the 90s were [edit: shot on film]. That's why you can get a widescreen HD release of Seinfeld, among others.

[–] Steve@communick.news 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

That's not always a good thing. If it was meant to be 4:3 the extra space on the frame can have set rigging, lights, microphone booms, and in case of stunts even crash pads.

It's one of the reasons the HD rescan of Buffy:TVS sucks. That still needs a proper 4:3 HD remaster.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Right, but the general public only ever saw the broadcast versions, which were predominantly in 4:3. Also, Seinfeld was only shot in 4:3 as it's a multi cam sitcom. The widescreen version you've seen is a crop of the original 4:3 picture.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] kumatomic@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That's what I'm watching right now too! I rewatch every year or two.

[–] 7u5k3n@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Such a great universe! :)

[–] _number8_@lemmy.world 84 points 7 months ago (7 children)

streaming just has godawful UX now as well. the apps play you commercials while in the menu, you have to worry about buffering, you aren't allowed to take screenshots (which is the most numbskulled DRM i've ever seen; they allowed it in the old days and everything was fine AND either way people have ALREADY managed to rip and share the raw footage. what's the point??), 75% of the fucking content on amazon you have to pay an extra fee for, media appears and disappears at the whim of pigheaded suits, prices go up every 6 months because fuck you, the blindingly stupid netflix 'single family home' restriction....

watching tv is meant to be fun, not introduce a whole other layer of bureaucratic bullshit into our lives

[–] Fisch@lemmy.ml 7 points 7 months ago

And don't forget that Amazon Prime doesn't just make you pay extra, they make you subscribe to additional subscriptions. I think there's like 3 extra sunscriptions for anime alone.

[–] Kekin@lemy.lol 6 points 7 months ago

IIRC the screenshot thing was the tipping point for me. Tried taking a screenshot in the Crunchyroll app for Android, and it came out black...

Looked into plex, and it's all been better ever since

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] jawa21@startrek.website 46 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Maybe I'm blind, maybe it's me viewing this on a phone, but I legitimately can't tell the difference.

[–] Rexios@lemm.ee 18 points 7 months ago

Zoom in on the guy’s face. The one on the right is crystal clear in comparison to the left.

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I can see the difference around the actor's skin and the environment, its less fuzzy. It's hard to tell the difference, definitely. It's compression quality.

What you have to understand about lossy compression is:

it throws out data you won't be able to perceive in ideal conditions (color ranges)
it throws out data that doesn't change between frames

[–] frogfruit@slrpnk.net 12 points 7 months ago

If you're using an app, you may need to adjust image quality in the settings. I thought the same thing until I tapped the HD button in Boost.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] CCMan1701A@startrek.website 35 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, if the streaming providers ever switch over to AV1 that would be an interesting comparison.

[–] SpiceDealer@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago (2 children)

AV1? that's a codec, right? I see in the preferences section for Piped. Is better than AVC (h.2640)?

[–] TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml 37 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It's also better than H.265/HEVC. Plus, it's open-source and royalty free.

[–] SpiceDealer@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

Sweet!

[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Better quality per file size than HEVC? cite?

[–] CCMan1701A@startrek.website 19 points 7 months ago (11 children)

Yes, AV1 is the next big deal. You can compress the hell out of the video and it still looks near original. I've re-encode some of my locally ripped movies for fun to see how it looks and it's really impressive.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 13 points 7 months ago (2 children)

it still looks near original.

Presumably you know, but for anyone else: the word for this is "transparent." It's when the codec leaves no noticeable artifacts.

[–] SatyrSack@lemmy.one 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

How would you use that in a sentence? Like "You can compress the hell out of the video and it's transparent"?

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago

You'd describe the encoding, not the source. The fun part is that it also applies to audio. "At 256 kbps, MP3 is transparent."

It only applies to lossy codecs. Lossless codecs, by definition, have no error. "Error" itself being a borrowed term. Good encodings don't have fewer errors... they have less error. For example, measured as mean squared error, where an individual sample being very wrong counts more than many samples being slightly wrong.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Petter1@lemm.ee 6 points 7 months ago

I wonder if the apple vision pro is able to play AV1 files 🤔 i guess, would be really bad if not

load more comments (9 replies)

[–] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 19 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Depends where you get your alternatively-sourced shows from. Downloaded a torrent yesterday that was so dark that I could barely see anything even with my screen's brightness turned all the way up. Downloaded another torrent of the same episode, and it was much easier to see everything.

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] Fenrisulfir@lemmy.ca 16 points 7 months ago

The big difference for me is the audio quality.

[–] satan@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 7 months ago

Hard to tell a difference on my phone, so I'm assuming most people won't care.

[–] Moonrise2473@feddit.it 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

But isn't the "alternatively sourced" a rip from Amazon prime?

But indeed on my Android tv if I use Amazon prime most of times it decides to use 720p with a low bitrate

[–] accideath@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago (2 children)

A lot of "alternative sources" are BluRay or even 4K Bluray rips. Of course there oftentimes also are Prime Video or Netflix rips but that just depends on availability. Usually there’s a choice. You can also download rips that are more compressed than Netflix would ever be but if you’re out for quality you just don’t download those unless there’s nothing better available.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] DannyMac@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago

I have a story, so I get wanting great video quality and why people get remuxes, but I have a friend who is borderline legally blind. His vision is so poor that he has to wear contacts and glasses at the same time. He has to get the remux version of things and complains about minor encoding artificacts from versions of things with smaller file sizes that I feel wouldn't bother 99.9% of the population. Hell years ago, before he got an updated prescription, he was driving and he mentioned how bad his vision was getting and I asked him if he could read the license plate for the car stopped in front of us and he laughed and said no. Anyway, I feel like the extra quality is wasted on him. He's like an audiophile who is hard of hearing. I just find this funny and wanted to share.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

Yup.

Canceled my Prime sub a month ago when they announced they were going to make people pay more to stay add free.

It's the high seas for me.

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 6 points 7 months ago

Wow that is absolutely ridiculous, thanks for sharing

[–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

It's wider?

[–] jaykay@lemmy.zip 3 points 7 months ago (4 children)

And here is me, not being able to find Jack Ryan anyway lol

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments