www.dead-donkey.com
https://forum.dead-donkey.com/

AFR: Ambiguity, qualification, and a new spec
https://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=13731		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:40 pm ]
Post subject: 
Thanks :)

*AFR references removed*
Sorry, you can only use it if you meet the spec, this is either over/undersized. 1/4 isn't in the spec :)
Author:  Geezus [ Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:35 pm ]
Post subject: 
spudthedestroyer wrote:
Thanks :)

*AFR references removed*
Sorry, you can only use it if you meet the spec, this is either over/undersized. 1/4 isn't in the spec :)


/Me throw tomato at spud's head *

You do know he was aiming to fit all 4 on 1 DVD ? :P
Author:  MCMLXXXVIII [ Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:42 pm ]
Post subject: 
Rules or no rules, any file size that is intended to be burnt to a DVD, whether 1/2, 1/3, 1/4 or 1/6 (or even 1/5!) could be considered AFR.

Especially handy when burning a movie series to one DVD like these are meant to be.

After all, burning to a DVD not CD is the whole point of AFR, isn't it. :wink:
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:39 pm ]
Post subject: 
/me points out to geezus that the AFR doesn't include 1/4 rips.
Geezus, no shit shurlock, did you work that out on your ps3 professor? :outsider: Wow... just wow... my mind has blown by the fact there's four movies... wow... I guess I needn't be any more sarcastic. :googley: Take a look at the AFR spec about the qualifications for using the afr keyword though, 1/4 isn't on it ;) :lol:

hehe, anyway, here's the spec
http://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?t=12810

it could-a-would-a-should-a but it isn't. Deal guys... if you want the spec changing, ask them to change it (http://www.fileheaven.org), its got sweet f all to do with me, Its no more an AFR rip than it is a TDX scene rip here, it doesn't meet either. Deal with it. ;)

Make up your own spec and keyword if you want and they refuse to allow 1/4th size rips. :) I think 1/4th sized rips were suggested and rejected for AFR before, but there's no harm in asking for a re-evaluation.


Personally: I really don't care, as long as you can see its a targetted filesize and not a mistake... i don't even use DVDrs. I have no idea why people keep pinning afr on me, i have nothing to do with writing the spec.
Author:  killingjokezzz [ Sat Feb 03, 2007 11:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
So how far has this explanation of AFR been extended to then? Does it exist anywhere outside of here and FileHeaven? If not then it is only a directive, chewed up and discussed only at FH and it maybe should be left there.

I like tha fact that things fit neatly onto a DVD whether it's 1/6, 1/3, 1/2, 1/4 whatever. I on't care either, but now this new 'rule' exists.

Someone at STF asked what AFR is a few weeks back. I didn't reply as I wasn't entirely sure.

At least TDX2005 is followed by everyone. However anal it may be nukes follow for anything not fitting in to those rules.

If AFR needs to exist it needs to be promulgated everywhere - not just at FH, that place is not the be all and end all.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:01 am ]
Post subject: 
erm, click the link to the thread i provided, its pretty clear. :) If it meets that, its AFR if you want to use the keyword. If you decide to change or write your own spec, you need to change the keyword or omit it, that's about it :)

You should have just pointed the guy at STF to that thread, there's not really any ambiguity. It doesn't have any restrictions or standards, no mention of cropping, deinterlacine, ivtc or other ripping mistakes, there's no codec restriction, etc. Its just a set of hints to help you get the most out of your space, and as a 'reward' you get to use a keyword :)

Its not fair to use the tag if yoou aren't following those guys regulation, it just creates ambiguity and if your doing something like dubbing or dual audioing, its defeating its purpose :)
Author:  killingjokezzz [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:19 am ]
Post subject: 
Clear where? Here? STF, FTi, PD101, SV, SBiG.....I may make up my own rules 'My AFR rules that apply only to me'. No, the rules themselves are clear....guidelines, rules, whatever you want to call them are meaningless unless promulgated.

Over at SBiG this post is still there with the --- tag. Problably now at other sites too. So everyone there thinks, hmm this is 1/4 DVD AFR...great stuff.

I've mentioned elsewhere that an AFR release at T3 was 1/4 size. Do you see why people get confused? It cannot be simply discussed, and decided at FH, that these 'rules' apply to everyone on ed2k or BT wherever.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:20 am ]
Post subject: 
Please don't post the keyword in threads that don't meet it :)

Well they shouldn't be using the keyword if it doesn't match the spec, that's the problem. People are using afr without any clue wtf it is, even though the spec is very clear. Unfortunately nobody has any control over anything out of their control, but as far as this site stands we can choose to follow AFR properly (smart idea), or we can choose to butcher it (imo. bad idea), and the afr is the afr that is clearly outlined in the thread and is being followed by the main groups following afr: unseen, etc.

Clear where how? :? :lol: There has only ever been one AFR spec, if other sites aren't enforcing it why are you telling me? You should be telling them.
Author:  killingjokezzz [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:27 am ]
Post subject: 
spudthedestroyer wrote:
Please don't post the keyword in threads that don't meet it :)

Well they shouldn't be using the keyword if it doesn't match the spec, that's the problem.


Yeah I just realised that after I posted it. Apologies.

I dunno, I'm still not enirely clear on this subject. I've just done a search at FTi for 'that tag' and yes it does throw up lots of flicks, meeting that criteria, yet absolutely no discussion about it either.

This release came up though at FTi, so it is being spread around the other sites. Vae you have some diting to do. :lol:
Author:  Vae Victis [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:55 am ]
Post subject: 
spudthedestroyer wrote:
Well they shouldn't be using the keyword if it doesn't match the spec, that's the problem. People are using afr without any clue wtf it is, even though the spec is very clear.

Oke, I feel the need to reply on that one.

I've made the 4 blind dead movies all 1/4 sized cause none needed more space (1/3 size would be overkill) and to have all 4 on 1 dvd looks much better than have a second dvd with the 4th.
But you probably guessed that yourself ;)

Imo afr is about using (reasonable!) sizes for movies so you don't waste space on dvd. If that means I don't have a clue wtf it is... well that would be a contradiction cause I simply do know wtf it is. But limiting yourself with only 1/6 or 1/3 or 1/2 sizes is just plain dumb (too be honest)
1/6 is often not enough to keep a good res and keep the ac3 track (I hate doing mp3, have a nick in crapping that up), where 1/3 is often just too big and unneeded for a movie. (widescreen, 80min anyone?)

Quote:
I think 1/4th sized rips were suggested and rejected for AFR before, but there's no harm in asking for a re-evaluation.

Just read the 16 pages on FH, couldn't find a single rejection in there.
Re-evaluate it is.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:59 am ]
Post subject: 
@killing,

Despite any conspiracy theories you may here, i don't actually run FTi. :lol: They don't actually enforce anything to do with afr which is fair enough. You can go on their site and posta 2MB rip and use the keyword if you want, i doubt they'll remove the keyword :)

If some other site chooses to ignore the afr then good for them :beerchug: , it would have been a bit better if they wouldn't have used the keyword if they changed the spec and thought of their own but that was up to them. Its like ripper tag stealing in that way thinking about it, but that's extreme (thinking of a worthless analogy... i'm in star trek mode). Some sites don't care if someone steals a rippers tags, some people don't care if a film is badly ripped as long as its 'free', some sites don't allow dvdrips that have flaws in their high quality section, etc. Different choices you know :)

At the end of the day, the point here is afr was devised by a rippers that have done a lot of work and produce rips of a higher standard than the scene which has been very beneficial to emule, they've written up a spec and done a lot of work. As far as this site is concerned, i'm not going to turn around and ambiguate the spec and the rippers efforts by making afr into something it isn't. I don't think that's very fair on them, and I hope everyone else agrees. Therefore we've (or it sounds increasingly more like I've :( ) decided to follow the afr rather than twist it to something it isn't or, as is mostly the case, leave it unmoderated to allow people to use it to allow dubs, varying sizes, etc. and mean it has little value as a keywoard. Its like the moderating decision to moderate cropping, interlacement, ivtc, etc and move threads... I think that may annoy some people but I think its been beneficial (right?). There's a feedback forum for any complaints, if you think we should abandon support for afr or whatever, post away :) :wacky:

Now when they reach a consensus to change the spec to include 1/4th then i'll certainly update the spec.

But of course, as i keep hinting at, why not propose your own standard, sizes and keyword if your disatisfied with it? There's some people that are, just as there's people who don't want anything but cdr sizes. You can then use both keywords for afr rips if the spec matches and then just your own (or one you've come into agreement with with others) on ones that aren't :) If you choose to tag your own threads with a keyword for your own spec, go for it... would be pretty worthless though. AFR has support by some of the best ed2k ripping groups i think, which is where its value as a loose spec gets weight. :)

I think i'll split this to the afr thread in a bit btw, although the bumps have probably been beneficial for the rip-click numbers :lol:


Vae Victis,
I know you did :) I was just pointing out that i'd removed the afr tag since its not in the spec. I don't mind, given i'm not an big fan of all the movies, i actually prefer them at 1/4 :)

There's an 8 page thread at fileheaven after the spec was posted, and there's a huge thread somewhere (smalltalk i think) about its original design. Its in the huge thread where 1/4th was brought up and poo-pooed:
http://72.15.144.56/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35331
I think there were some other threads where they weren't justified enough to include in the spec. Neither was 1/5th or any other fraction :lol:

edit:
I found this quote since i sense people are thinking this is something attibuted to my own design:
stereozulu wrote:
3. this is JUST about the --- "search word" inside a thread

That's all :)
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:16 am ]
Post subject: 
*split and move*

:)
Author:  Vae Victis [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:22 am ]
Post subject: 
okey here's my reply I though I had misposted and deleted.. ;)
dddfffddd nice title spud :D

@Spud, that one I meant (it's 16 pages for me)
And I couldn't find a single pooed there ;) only one person replying with: Why not 1/5....
I did find several afr rippers in favor or atleast positive.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:23 am ]
Post subject: 
There's gotta be some more threads somewhere, that's way too civilised. unfortunately the fh search appears to be broken :lol:

There was one suggestion:
Boondock wrote:
agreed, it's more efficient in some cases. but it doesn't do justice to the 'cause'. i think dvdr sizes should be clear and recognisable. Why not use 1/5 dvdr?
i think 1/6, 2/6, and f.e. 3/6 is a nice standard for now


There's kind of a problem that 1/4 adds the problem when mixing with /6th sized rips.


I'd suggest you creata topic in fileheaven.org about adding 1/4th to the specs ;) Its probably a wise idea to get the views back into the light.

That or we can suggest a harf we develop at dead-donkey (pronounced half, as in kinda meeting arf or Horrorhasahome Advanced Filesize Regulation :Wacky:)

I've just noticed that 1 DVDr sized rips aren't actually written up in the spec so you definitely should point that out as another flaw. :lol:

Something like:
1) 1/6th, 1/4th, 1/2th, 1 DVD-r sized rips (DVD-r being slightly less capacity so the one to size for :) )
2) MPEG4 codec only
3) vobsub languages as seperate files
4) no dubs if original audio track available
5) no commentary tracks to be muxed
6) cropped, deinterlaced and ivtc'd if needed
7) must provide shots with boobies, even if they aren't in the movie
8) No movies with keanu Reaves as "the one"

:lol:

edit: even the board code seems to agree with the last rule, 8 ) = 8) :llol:
Author:  Vae Victis [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:35 am ]
Post subject: 
It shouldn't pose problems afaik.
If my calc skills are half of what they used to be:
1dvd = 1/4*2 + 1/3 + 1/6
1dvd = 1/4*2 + 1/6*3
and still several other options.

I do agree that 1/5 isn't a good one, you would always need 5 of them.
Same for 1/7 etc.

And posted in that topic ;)
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:37 am ]
Post subject: 
good stuff, get it cleared up and agree'd on and we won't have to harf it if its a problem :lol:
Author:  Vae Victis [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:38 am ]
Post subject: 
I agree on that :)
Author:  killingjokezzz [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:09 am ]
Post subject: 
Shit, and I was doing a 1/4 FD size rip. That's Floppy Disk for you noobs :lol:
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:12 am ]
Post subject: 
killingjokezzz wrote:
Shit


Note only that but...

*BAD CLUSTER SIZE*
:wacky:
Author:  wargand [ Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:16 am ]
Post subject: 
killingjokezzz wrote:
Shit, and I was doing a 1/4 FD size rip. That's Floppy Disk for you noobs :lol:


You know what a Floppy Disk is? Wow, you must be one of the oldest members here. :lol:
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
What's blood for, if not for shedding?