Time for DVDR-based .avi scene rules?

The current rules are based on the 700mb cd format.
Are there many people who still use cds?
Shouldn't the rules be updated to the dvd size (ie 1/4 or 1/3 of a dvd size)?
That would improve the quality and be more logical, given that the cdrs are pretty much dead, aside from audio use.

And aside the usual standalone compatibility, there should also be an enforced rule of unpacked bitstream, you hear me LOL?  

What do you think?

What do you think?

I think you need a break from computers.

[Eric2203]

What's the point ? If you can burn DVDs, get the DVD rip. Yes I know you said 1/4 or 1/3 of the size, but again: what's the point ? CDR for those with no DVD burner, DVD rips for those with one. I don't really see the need to add a new standard. Plus I'd rather download the DVD image than a smaller-than-DVD but bigger-than-CD avi if I can burn DVDs.

So, what do I think ? No thanks.

Plus I'd rather download the DVD image than a smaller-than-DVD but bigger-than-CD avi if I can burn DVDs.

I couldnt agree anymore...

I 2nd that.

Plus I'd rather download the DVD image than a smaller-than-DVD but bigger-than-CD avi if I can burn DVDs.

I couldnt agree anymore...

The good thing about .avi on DVD is that you can pack HD material onto it. (Granted you can find HD source material somewhere)

Though you'd probably have to play it off a computer via TV-OUT, as I've yet to find a DVD player that manages the high resolution video decoding. (I have gotten audio but no video on both my divx/xvid players when I've fooled around with this.)

But 2 hours of 1080i/720p + 5.1 compressed down to 4.7GB of divx/xvid/h264/whatever goodness yields suprisingly good results.

Almost makes these crazy-expensive next-gen discs worthless for video, when you can just compress the titles onto a cheapo DVD and maintain the resolution/framerate.

[ViRuS_PW]

xvid is smaller and almost identical to dvd quality
there is absolutely no point plus it would take a lot longer to donwload for people that just wanna watch and dont care about burning.

[Eric2203]

Plus I'd rather download the DVD image than a smaller-than-DVD but bigger-than-CD avi if I can burn DVDs.

I couldnt agree anymore...

The good thing about .avi on DVD is that you can pack HD material onto it. (Granted you can find HD source material somewhere)

Though you'd probably have to play it off a computer via TV-OUT, as I've yet to find a DVD player that manages the high resolution video decoding. (I have gotten audio but no video on both my divx/xvid players when I've fooled around with this.)

But 2 hours of 1080i/720p + 5.1 compressed down to 4.7GB of divx/xvid/h264/whatever goodness yields suprisingly good results.

Almost makes these crazy-expensive next-gen discs worthless for video, when you can just compress the titles onto a cheapo DVD and maintain the resolution/framerate.

That's a completely different issue. This thread was about ripping standard definition DVDs to xvid/divx. There's no point right now in making them bigger than 1 or 2 CDs (see arguments in the posts above). Plus the idea is to minimize the size anyway.

Now for high-definition content, which is what you're talking about, it would make sense to establish a set of rules that take a DVD as a base size. Once groups experiment with ripping HD-DVDs/Blue-Ray Discs, we might find that the resulting .avi ends up being roughly the size of a DVD.

DVD -> CD
HD-DVD/BD -> DVD

Makes sense to me if it's possible. That means high-def content on a reasonably cheap and tried media (DVD). Which is what happened when DVDs started getting ripped into .avis that fit on a CD. History might repeat itself.

Have you guys looked at some of these Xvid/Divx releases lately. I mean if you rip the audio and video into 2 seperate files using a direct stream with virtual dub with no downsampling or anything. The audio is usually bigger then the video itself 400mb being the audio and 300mb being the video I mean wtf, I want high quality video not shitty video and high quality audio I AM NOT LISTENING TO THE FUCKING THING.

Thats where some rules need to come in.

[ViRuS_PW]

Have you guys looked at some of these Xvid/Divx releases lately. I mean if you rip the audio and video into 2 seperate files using a direct stream with virtual dub with no downsampling or anything. The audio is usually bigger then the video itself 400mb being the audio and 300mb being the video I mean wtf, I want high quality video not shitty video and high quality audio I AM NOT LISTENING TO THE FUCKING THING.

Thats where some rules need to come in.

LOL are you an idiot? you have to select mp3 MPEG3 option NOT wav

Nope I don't think you get what I am saying. Ya virtual dub saves the file by default as a .wav extension but you still need the codec for what the movies audio track was encoded with eg. .mp3 .wav .ac3, Most of the time the file is ac3 about 400mb and not a wav file. So I have a 400mb ac3 file + a 300mb video file.

sometimes you can even tell just by looking at the bitrate of the original video file check out the bitrate of the audio in the summary tab.

xvid + ac3 encodes are released on 2 discs, not 1.

So you have 1 GB for video and 400 megs for audio, which works out just fine.

[ViRuS_PW]

youre downloading some shitty releases then
ac3 comes on 2 cds..always otherwise the video quality would be really shit.

[g]

xvid looks and sounds fine to me, and I don't want them any bigger than 2-3 cds depending on length, because i like that they are small, takes 20 mins to leech and 1 min to unrar.

dvdr takes 2 hours to leech and 10 mins to unrar.

[jeef]

xvid looks and sounds fine to me, and I don't want them any bigger than 2-3 cds depending on length, because i like that they are small, takes 20 mins to leech and 1 min to unrar.

dvdr takes 2 hours to leech and 10 mins to unrar.

They shouldn't be compressed at all, what groups are using any rar method other than STORE?

edit: I'm dyslexic, thought you said it took 20 mintes to unrar.