Please login to reply
|
|||||
[#208307]
Written by: jer_sey [19/11/2013, 19:37] |
|||||
the 2nd is better than the 1st. hope it continues | |||||
[#208312]
Written by: ockraz [19/11/2013, 22:04] |
|||||
i'm confused. is almost.human.s01e02.repack.proper.hdtv.x264-2hd the same as almost.human.s01e02.proper.hdtv.x264-2hd and if not, what is the difference? if they're the same, why the different file names? seems like i've downloaded this show (not ep) at least 3 or 4 times in the last 24hrs. |
|||||
[#208327]
Written by: Bazzakrak [20/11/2013, 00:16] |
|||||
stolen from post from the proper episode: nuked: almost.human.s01e02.proper.hdtv.x264-2hd reason: contains.uncut.commercial.10m05s-10m25s_get.repack successor: almost.human.s01e02.repack.proper.hdtv.x264-2hd i sent a message to our torrent team. please, no off-site links (for 24 hours) to torrents made by other torrent groups. eztv will provide it's own torrent. |
|||||
[#208346]
Written by: hello5000 [20/11/2013, 06:25] |
|||||
just watched the 1st and 2nd episode. really like it so far. it reminds me of a show made a while ago, total recall 2070. |
|||||
[#208371]
Written by: ockraz [21/11/2013, 00:26] |
|||||
if a torrent is nuked and a corrected one is subsequently issued, is the result always a proper? if the one with the ad hadn't already replaced a nuked release would it have merely been a repack or a proper or both? |
|||||
[#208373]
Written by: ockraz [21/11/2013, 00:50] |
|||||
i was thinking the same thing- except that this is waaay better than tr2070- that was about 15 years ago and the fx are lots better now. plus, the production values are better and the direction has a grittier feel which lends realism and helps with suspending disbelief about alternate/future worlds. tr2070 was shot like tng or babylon 5, whereas the camera work on this is nypd blue- influenced. tr2070 really didn't have much to do with we can remember it for you wholesale, although they tried to incorporate elements from p.k. dick stories into the series whenever possible. this second episode reminded me a bit of the best film made from a dick novel. blade runner's prostitute replicants and this shows 'bang bots' had a lot of similarities. so does the lab guy here and the character played by the actor who was brother larry on newhart. the first ep reminded me of the will smith movie loosely based on asimov's 'i, robot'- both in terms of the 'look' of the possible future and the fact that a police officer came to distrust robots after a traumatic incident that resulted in the loss of a limb. of course, it's asimov who created the robot police partner genre with caves of steel and the r. daneel olivaw novels that followed :d |
|||||
[#208374]
Written by: BoonesFerry [21/11/2013, 00:55] |
|||||
good questions. when a scene release is flawed (does not meet the standards) it is nuked. the sd x264 tv releasing standards 2012 http://scenerules.irc.gs/n.html?id=2012_sdtvx264u1.nfo the 720p x264 tv releasing standards 2011 update 2 http://scenerules.irc.gs/n.html?id=2011_tv_x264_u2.nfo the successor..... if released by the same scene group, it is a repack. if released by a different scene group, it is a proper chronologically we have... 1st - almost human s01e02 hdtv x264-lol -- nuked (descriptive.audio.used) 2nd - almost human s01e02 proper hdtv x264-2hd -- nuked (contains.uncut.commercial) 3rd - almost human s01e02 repack proper hdtv x264-2hd -- current winner lol was nuked, so 2hd did a proper, but it was nuked too, then 2hd released a repack of their own proper, making it a repack proper. |
|||||
[#208375]
Written by: BoonesFerry [21/11/2013, 01:06] |
|||||
i'm also enjoying this series so far |
|||||
[#208418]
Written by: ockraz [21/11/2013, 21:05] |
|||||
okay- so let's say that there's something that's relatively obscure and only one group is bothering to release it- if their first release is nuked, then the successor with the flaw corrected would not be a proper, but would instead be called a repack? in other words, there must be two different groups' releases involved for one to be a proper? |
|||||
[#208419]
Written by: ockraz [21/11/2013, 21:17] |
|||||
ps: it seems to me that lol gets their releases nuked more often than other groups. then again, based just on my own dl'ing, lol and hd seem to 'win' more often than others. if i'm right that lol has a disproportionate share of nuked releases, is that because they're less meticulous, or is it that they're fast and we'd be seeing more mistakes crop up from other groups if they were first more often? am i correct that if a release which doesn't win the race to be first is found to be flawed, then the "nuked" label doesn't apply? |
|||||
[#208423]
Written by: BoonesFerry [21/11/2013, 23:26] |
|||||
if two, or more, groups are racing to be the first group to release an episode, whichever finishes first is the winner and the only release that counts. if two groups finish within seconds or a minute of eachother and both had already posted releases to the top sites then the later one would be nuked and tagged as a dup (duplicate). if some-show by some group is nuked, for other reasons, then the race is back on until someone wins the race. if the new winner of the race is the same group as before then it would be tagged as a repack. however if the new winner of the race is a different group then it would be tagged as proper. repack = same group proper = different group there are site with scene lingo/terminology defintions. check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/warez_scene#release_procedure http://scenelingo.wordpress.com/ p.s. i have not performed any statistical analysis on nuke ratios between groups in over a year so i don't know for sure, but lately it does seem that lol has a higher rate of nuked releases. one possible cause could be that they take shortcuts to win races and those shortcuts may raise the rate of errors. or maybe they have new or less skilled members on their team. or have inferior hardware/software. who knows. there are many possible causes. |
|||||
[#208514]
Written by: ockraz [24/11/2013, 11:12] |
|||||
thank you for the links. the scenelingo definitions are helpful. i bookmarked it. there were a lot of terms i'd wondered about that it explained. i like that they use examples - especially ones with images. the wikipedia article explained why it is that i occasionally dl something with a sfv file (which seemed to me to serve no purpose), and via the 'see also' section i found the 'standard (warez)' article. i was particularly interested in the "3.3.4: x264 for television sources" section and the "comments from the scene groups" (it has to be shown/unhidden). after reading wikipedia articles about the warez scene and perusing the scenelingo site, i now have a bunch of new questions. i'll limit myself to two because most aren't related to the original topic and while i'm glad you've indulged my curiosity so far, i don't want to overtax your forbearance (or patience). 1. lol originally won the race, but their release was nuked, so the 2hd release was tagged as proper, but when it was nuked 2hd released a repack. so, the official scene release is tagged as repack.proper - but what would have happened if after 2hd's proper was nuked, some third group submitted a version of the episode that met all the standards before 2hd submitted their repack?. the third group's release would be labeled proper, but how would it be distinguished from the 2hd release as the real error free release? would it be labeled a proper.proper? if lol submitted a version that didn't violate any rules after 2hd's release was nuked but before 2hd released their repack would it be tagged a repack.proper.proper - or would that just make everyone's head explode? 2. i have a few files that are tagged as a retorrent. i didn't find a definition of that at scenelingo or on wikipedia, but on a third site called seadict i found this: a re-download option within a bittorrent client that allows for the automatic overwrite of previously downloaded files. this would allow for torrent repacks that can then use the original .torrent file. to allow the use of this feature without downloading unwanted information this would work much like update software for a program. upon starting the .torrent file in your personal manager you could get and automatic updated files query, which would be an option to do automatically during start, or upon user specified query. upon succesful query there would be a list of new or updated files that are included in the download. you could at this point choose to download the updated or new files, or to ignore the changed or added files and still download the old version. for those who want to download the old file versions they would simply connect to others who have the older file sets. this would be possible with a simple hash check. for the hash check each file that is updated or added would change the hash value within the torrent file, therefor changing the hash of the torrent file would specify which files were to be downloaded for this hash check. an update feature could be built into the re-download functions that allows for the addition or change of existing files in the directory straight from their system. this allows for the user to update the existing file without having to re-upload the existing .torrent file. the user would then be the first seed to hold the new file and act accordingly. i don't think that that's the definition i'm looking for, but i'm not sure. |
|||||
[#208528]
Written by: BoonesFerry [24/11/2013, 16:22] |
|||||
1) it might be a real repack proper...or some other combo. 2) if the error or flaw is not with the scene release, but instead is an error on our end with our own torrent, eztv will use retorrent in the title to denote that eztv has re-torrented. we have gone way off-topic for this forum thread if you have additional questions, feel free to send me a pvt message or use the tech q&a forum: http://eztv.it/pm/inbox/create/120583/ http://eztv.it/forum/11054/please-use-this-thread-for-technical-questions-and-answers/ |
|||||