View Single Post
  #47   Report Post  
Old October 25th 19, 02:35 PM posted to uk.transport.london
Roland Perry Roland Perry is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,125
Default C5 Fare Dodgers - question

In message , at 23:59:30
on Thu, 24 Oct 2019, David Cantrell remarked:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 02:09:26PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:23:32
on Thu, 24 Oct 2019, David Cantrell remarked:
I think that shows it's quite some time since you were on the
naughtynet! Looking at dodgy copies of rugby world cup quarter finals
highlights as an example, in the list I'm looking at right now no-one is
offering files that highly-compressed. Of those that are on offer, the
least popular is the most compressed (348MB for 32 minutes) and the most
popular is the least compressed (1.56GB for 32 minutes).

For the majority of TV soap operas, what we once might have described as
"VHS quality" is entirely adequate for viewers to follow the [rather
weak in many cases] plotline|story-arc.


Just because that may be sufficient (of course a text file reading "it's
****, get a life" would be too) doesn't mean that that's what people
actually download. The only content you'll regularly run across at low
resolution and heavily compressed is *old* content.


Is that because the originators can't be bothered to compress it
properly, or is it in fact compressed quite a lot, but is *also* very
high definition?

I haven't got a lot of examples, but one is a well known 1280x720 TV
whodunnit show where they get 1.5hrs into 1.2GB
--
Roland Perry