4 ms·

To disagree, no. the quality (for a western show) is generally at least as high as you'd expect of official merchandise I got all of Futurama on many fewer di

To disagree, no. the quality (for a western show) is generally at least as high as you'd expect of official merchandise I got all of Futurama on many fewer discs than the official stuff uses, at no visible hit to quality If you got Futurama on many fewer discs than the official edition, it is extremely likely that the quality was not "at least as high as you'd expect of official merchandise." You may not have noticed it, in your viewing scenario, but it is almost guaranteed that your copies were compressed at a much higher level of compression loss. That, and the physical media itself is of unknown quality. As a user, I would complain. Loudly.

thaumasiotes 13y ago
Higher level of compression, of course. Why higher level of loss? There are various compression technologies. Some are better and worse, according to your purpose. My viewing scenario was a 16:10 17" screen (I believe 1440x9XX) and Bose headphones. That beats the resolution expectations of broadcast TV, and definitively crushes the audio expectations. Full disclosure: I've watched Futurama in the form of torrented episodes （quality varies), chinese bootleg DVDs (high quality), and official DVDs (also high quality). May I ask about your experience with Chinese DVDs?
- rallison 13y ago
  I hesitate to respond, only because this is becoming somewhat off-topic to the article itself. That said, I was assuming the scenario of a counterfeit DVD that would play on any standard DVD player. Sure, there are more efficient compression algorithms now, but most aren't supported as standard on every DVD player out there. The base DVD specification is rather limited in codec support. Those Futurama counterfeits - which compression algorithm are they using? Will they play on all standard dvd players?
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    Sadly, I don't know the answer to this; even the impeccably-licensed official translated Disney movies I've bought don't tend to work in US DVD players (region coded, I guess), so I never try. I play DVDs via computer (for one thing, that means I don't have to buy a DVD player in China; I already have computers). I don't have the discs with me, so it's impossible to check. :( I can think of a couple scenarios -- (a) my error, it's actually the same number of discs, but packed into one box instead of four boxes; (b) they're nonstandard, but still recognized as DVDs by VLC; (c) (highly speculative) something about the limited palette of cartoons makes them more susceptible to compression, and that was exploited. For what it's worth, the reason I included the qualifier "(for a western show)" is that I once bought a set of bootleg DVDs for a chinese TV show, and they were compressed to the point where I found them unwatchable. They still played through VLC; my best guess is that DVD-making software was used on ripped, heavily-compressed video files. It is entirely possible that something similar was done for my Futurama discs, although no compression was visible in that case.
malandrew 13y ago
All depends on the compression. You can have a show take up less space on a disk, but be of higher quality. DVDs are usually stored as MPEG2. If you have a source of higher fidelity (e.g. BluRay), but distribute it as H264 on DVD, it's entirely possible that that copy is of greater quality than an official DVD.
- rallison 13y ago
  As I alluded to in my response to thaumasiotes, I am perfectly aware that some compression algorithms are better than others. But, this whole conversation is being made with regard to counterfeit DVDs being passed off as the real thing. In such a case, something like H264 on DVD won't work in many players, thus the issue. The original scenario is counterfeits getting mixed in with official stock on Amazon. If the counterfeit uses a compression algorithm that works on all DVD players, it won't take any fewer discs as compared to the original. If the compression algorithm chosen is something more efficient (such as H264), and uses fewer discs, it won't work on many players, and the whole "I find it unlikely that a user, as opposed to a media company running stings, would ever complain" as voiced by thaumasiotes, is no longer valid.
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    I don't have a good sense of how to be properly gracious, so today I'll try this way. You make good points, and I don't object to the things you've said. I wish my situation was less fuzzily-defined. :/
    - rallison 13y ago
      thaumasiotes, I appreciate this. I think, to an extent, I understand where you are coming from. Just as a side note, I say all of this as someone who does not agree with the MPAA nor copyright law in the US.

thaumasiotes 13y ago

Higher level of compression, of course. Why higher level of loss? There are various compression technologies. Some are better and worse, according to your purpose. My viewing scenario was a 16:10 17" screen (I believe 1440x9XX) and Bose headphones. That beats the resolution expectations of broadcast TV, and definitively crushes the audio expectations. Full disclosure: I've watched Futurama in the form of torrented episodes （quality varies), chinese bootleg DVDs (high quality), and official DVDs (also high quality). May I ask about your experience with Chinese DVDs?

rallison 13y ago
I hesitate to respond, only because this is becoming somewhat off-topic to the article itself. That said, I was assuming the scenario of a counterfeit DVD that would play on any standard DVD player. Sure, there are more efficient compression algorithms now, but most aren't supported as standard on every DVD player out there. The base DVD specification is rather limited in codec support. Those Futurama counterfeits - which compression algorithm are they using? Will they play on all standard dvd players?
- thaumasiotes 13y ago
  Sadly, I don't know the answer to this; even the impeccably-licensed official translated Disney movies I've bought don't tend to work in US DVD players (region coded, I guess), so I never try. I play DVDs via computer (for one thing, that means I don't have to buy a DVD player in China; I already have computers). I don't have the discs with me, so it's impossible to check. :( I can think of a couple scenarios -- (a) my error, it's actually the same number of discs, but packed into one box instead of four boxes; (b) they're nonstandard, but still recognized as DVDs by VLC; (c) (highly speculative) something about the limited palette of cartoons makes them more susceptible to compression, and that was exploited. For what it's worth, the reason I included the qualifier "(for a western show)" is that I once bought a set of bootleg DVDs for a chinese TV show, and they were compressed to the point where I found them unwatchable. They still played through VLC; my best guess is that DVD-making software was used on ripped, heavily-compressed video files. It is entirely possible that something similar was done for my Futurama discs, although no compression was visible in that case.

malandrew 13y ago

All depends on the compression. You can have a show take up less space on a disk, but be of higher quality. DVDs are usually stored as MPEG2. If you have a source of higher fidelity (e.g. BluRay), but distribute it as H264 on DVD, it's entirely possible that that copy is of greater quality than an official DVD.

rallison 13y ago
As I alluded to in my response to thaumasiotes, I am perfectly aware that some compression algorithms are better than others. But, this whole conversation is being made with regard to counterfeit DVDs being passed off as the real thing. In such a case, something like H264 on DVD won't work in many players, thus the issue. The original scenario is counterfeits getting mixed in with official stock on Amazon. If the counterfeit uses a compression algorithm that works on all DVD players, it won't take any fewer discs as compared to the original. If the compression algorithm chosen is something more efficient (such as H264), and uses fewer discs, it won't work on many players, and the whole "I find it unlikely that a user, as opposed to a media company running stings, would ever complain" as voiced by thaumasiotes, is no longer valid.
- thaumasiotes 13y ago
  I don't have a good sense of how to be properly gracious, so today I'll try this way. You make good points, and I don't object to the things you've said. I wish my situation was less fuzzily-defined. :/
  - rallison 13y ago
    thaumasiotes, I appreciate this. I think, to an extent, I understand where you are coming from. Just as a side note, I say all of this as someone who does not agree with the MPAA nor copyright law in the US.