On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 07:02:49PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:08:54 on Tue, 22 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked:
Presumably they'll have moved on from HDDs to solid state storage by now?
They're only storing relatively low res compressed JPEGs, so the files will
be small.
My dashcam stores ridiculously uncompressed video.
250MB every 5 minutes.

Downloaded TV shows are typically 200MB for their 42 minutes.

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).

--
David Cantrell | Official London Perl Mongers Bad Influence

Longum iter est per praecepta, breve et efficax per exempla.

In message , at 12:23:32
on Thu, 24 Oct 2019, David Cantrell remarked:
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 07:02:49PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:08:54 on Tue, 22 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked:
Presumably they'll have moved on from HDDs to solid state storage by now?
They're only storing relatively low res compressed JPEGs, so the files will
be small.
My dashcam stores ridiculously uncompressed video.
250MB every 5 minutes.

Downloaded TV shows are typically 200MB for their 42 minutes.

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.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:09:26 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 12:23:32
on Thu, 24 Oct 2019, David Cantrell remarked:
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 07:02:49PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:08:54 on Tue, 22 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked:
Presumably they'll have moved on from HDDs to solid state storage by now?
They're only storing relatively low res compressed JPEGs, so the files will
be small.
My dashcam stores ridiculously uncompressed video.
250MB every 5 minutes.

Downloaded TV shows are typically 200MB for their 42 minutes.

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.

Yes, but not if they're shown on 55" TVs. People now expect HD
quality.

In message , at 16:08:47 on
Thu, 24 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked:

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.

Yes, but not if they're shown on 55" TVs. People now expect HD
quality.

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! (Sorry - I had to.)

On 24/10/2019 20:53, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! (Sorry - I had to.)


Cardinal Biggles I assume?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall wrote:

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! (Sorry - I had to.)


Cardinal Biggles I assume?

Monty Python - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAn7baRbhx4

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.

--
David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david

Do not be afraid of cooking, as your ingredients will know and misbehave
-- Fergus Henderson

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