How about 1.98 GB AFR's ?

Geezus · **Posted:** Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:12 pm **Post subject:** How about 1.98 GB AFR's ?

As title.

Near 2gig rips.
It's a decent compromise between high quality AND compatibility

These days, I find myself chopping AFR's in half more often than I like.
Ending up with a glorified 2cd rip.

Yes you would end up with the old 'problem' of 300meg's of wasted space.
Well frankly, fuck those whiners.
They usually use cheap brands anyway.

I say thee, YEEE !

elchupacabra · **Posted:** Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:39 pm **Post subject:**

Why exactly 1.98 GBytes Geenius? :lol:

Geezus · **Posted:** Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:58 pm **Post subject:**

elchupacabra wrote:

Why exactly 1.98 GBytes Geenius? :lol:

Me, Geenius wrote:

...Near 2 gig rips

The 2 Gig barrier is a Standalone killer.

ViSCeRaL · **Posted:** Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:08 pm **Post subject:**

Fuck standalones. :mrgreen:

^Rogue^ · **Posted:** Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:24 pm **Post subject:**

ViSCeRaL wrote:

Fuck standalones. :mrgreen:

pure · **Posted:** Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:12 am **Post subject:**

^Rogue^ wrote:

ViSCeRaL wrote:

Fuck standalones. :mrgreen:

elchupacabra · **Posted:** Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:19 am **Post subject:**

Some standalones already have problems with files bigger than 1 GB.

Geezus wrote:

The 2 Gig barrier is a Standalone killer.

Yes, but why 1,98. Why not 1,97 or 1,99 or 1,985? :wacky:

MCMLXXXVIII · **Posted:** Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:24 pm **Post subject:**

It makes no difference to me what size rips are as I only archive to an external HD, just as long as the filesize is appropriate to the source.

spudthedestroyer · **Posted:** Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:36 pm **Post subject:**

imo, utterly terrible idea.

Geezus · **Posted:** Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:38 pm **Post subject:**

Whoosh!.

Lotsa Patrick Swayze fans around here.

Still, I don't see how , for example, 1.98 dvdr's are a terrible idea whereas 1/2DVD is rated to be the ultimate accolade.

Yes I was referring to 1/2DVD rips of course.

spudthedestroyer · **Posted:** Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:24 pm **Post subject:**

its a terrible idea because its promoting random sizes; soley to provide a waste of space on optical media for people who bought hardware that was a waste of space in the first place. just load the files over the network or cut them, but imo its a terrible idea to introduce a random size for the sake of laziness or poor choices.

Nothing worse than a random birrage of waste to accomodate someone who ultimately drank from the wrong cup....

I sure as hell won't be ripping anything @ a random size, but then i'm not a big fan of the 1/2dvdr format for a movie under 3 hrs anyway.

RedVeil · **Posted:** Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:29 pm **Post subject:**

If I create 3 1/3 AFR rips. Do they fit onto a DVD? Is that the sense of AFR. Or is it only for searching movies in forums?

ViSCeRaL · **Posted:** Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:00 pm **Post subject:**

RedVeil wrote:

If I create 3 1/3 AFR rips. Do they fit onto a DVD? Is that the sense of AFR. Or is it only for searching movies in forums?

It's quality versus a filesize that will fill a DVD with no wasted space.

More info here: http://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?t=12810
and here: http://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?t=13731

TaKYoN · **Posted:** Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:16 pm **Post subject:**

My fully qualified and professional* stance on this is as follows:-

Who gives a flying fuck? Not me. As long as the quality is OK then I really don't give a shit what the size is. The crap films get watched on my laptop and the good shit gets either burned to disk and kept or output to my TV.

*By qualified and professional I actually mean no idea, but I am a genius so that should be enough for most peasants.

spudthedestroyer · **Posted:** Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:27 am **Post subject:**

RedVeil wrote:

If I create 3 1/3 AFR rips. Do they fit onto a DVD? Is that the sense of AFR. Or is it only for searching movies in forums?

The whole point was to drop the cdr format and use the cheaper and widely available dvdr format related sizes. AFR sizes are based around a) absolutely no waste when fitting content to a DVDr disk b) higher quality standards of rips. The only acceptable straying i've seen is for say, five shit movies that can be ripped at one fifth. If you reduce sizes to random sizes with no logic behind filling the space then you don't qualify for the keyword according to the overly simple spec.

A lot of people try and subvert the idea though, advanced filesize keyword must accomodate the above two points as well as have at least the original audio track.

Personally, i think dubs should be flat out banned from the spec since i don't consider it acceptable quality but maybe that's because I'm a passionate movie fan

However the spec just requires original audio.

TDX is way out of date, it would be nice for a spec that was usable from the scene but they are way too caught up in archaic thought processes in terms of coming up with an advanced spec

TaKYoN · **Posted:** Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:52 am **Post subject:**

Er, what Spud said.

RedVeil · **Posted:** Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:55 am **Post subject:**

spudthedestroyer wrote:

RedVeil wrote:

If I create 3 1/3 AFR rips. Do they fit onto a DVD? Is that the sense of AFR. Or is it only for searching movies in forums?

The whole point was to drop the cdr format and use the cheaper and widely available dvdr format related sizes. AFR sizes are based around a) absolutely no waste when fitting content to a DVDr disk b) higher quality standards of rips. The only acceptable straying i've seen is for say, five shit movies that can be ripped at one fifth. If you reduce sizes to random sizes with no logic behind filling the space then you don't qualify for the keyword according to the overly simple spec.

A lot of people try and subvert the idea though, advanced filesize keyword must accomodate the above two points as well as have at least the original audio track.

Personally, i think dubs should be flat out banned from the spec since i don't consider it acceptable quality but maybe that's because I'm a passionate movie fan

However the spec just requires original audio.

TDX is way out of date, it would be nice for a spec that was usable from the scene but they are way too caught up in archaic thought processes in terms of coming up with an advanced spec

So the answer would be yes. :mrgreen:

spudthedestroyer · **Posted:** Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:24 pm **Post subject:**

not exactly :lol:

The sense of AFR is no waste, if you do a dub of any kind then its not afr and you do not qualify for the keyword.

Its here:
http://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?t=12810

RedVeil · **Posted:** Sun Jan 20, 2008 6:28 pm **Post subject:**

I know, I know. It's no waste. You would probably be happier to get a AFR rip instead of vob files anyways.

tenorbass · **Posted:** Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:51 pm **Post subject:**

How about no.... :lol:

Takes me long enough to dl a 1.45 gig rip ahaha

How about 1.98 GB AFR's ?

Who is online