Basically, video is like an intricate painting. There's probably thousands of tiny details included, but for someone to replicate that painting, and all the tiny details along with it, would be extremely taxing.

Encoding (and specifically "compressing") is like a good con artist - he won't spend his whole life trying to make an exact replica of the original, but instead will create a replica that looks like it - and will fool most people.

Encoding is essentially the same concept. The very original source file that the studio themselves create can be hundreds of gigabytes large - it contains every single speck of detail that was recorded from their high quality equipment, because, well... it's the very file that the cameras recorded.

But people don't have 500gb of free space per movie, and discs can't carry such large files either. So, they make the replica. They make a copy a tenth of the size -still 50gb, mind you- that contains most of the details of the original. Match the two side by side with a computer, and you might see a difference. But for the casual 4K 70 inch flatscreen user, the extra "details" are lost on him - they're so minute it's not worth the extra space.

Now, we don't have 50gb of space to allocate for each movie either. So the encoding pirate teams do is the same thing, but taking it further - trying to make a 5gb or 1gb replica that contains the majority of the lighting, details, sound cues, etc. Depending on a number of factors (including the "source" files, but that's a whole 'nother discussion), you can get better replicas, and worse replicas.

But "replicas" ('encodes' in our context) are rarely good enough to fool people watching movies with high end equipment. The higher end and larger resolution your TV/monitor is, the easier it is to spot the difference in detail.

But there have been some people who consistently created very small-sized encodes that are "good enough" for most standard users. Save space, keep all the major details = everyone wins.

These people who built up a reputation for themselves are the "GECKOS", "AC3", "BvS", "LOKY", etc. that you've mentioned. They're teams of people who have their own special encoding settings (read: replica tricks) and encode many movies/TV shows into small sizes, while trying to keep the most quality they can. YIFY was a famous movie encoder than garnered a lot of fans - his encodes were very affordable sized (~700mb for a 720p version, and ~1.1gb for a 1080p version), and pretty much "fooled" people into thinking they were watching a higher quality version than the one provided.

So as for the size of movies, a 15gb version of Star Wars will most probably look better than the 2-3gb version of it - the 15gb has more details, and therefore looks better, than the 2-3gb version, which most likely has to choose between what details are "important" to keep and what is essentially lost on the viewer. Personally... I've seen the difference with a 15gb version, but that's for those with great screens, and the difference is minimal.

H.264/x264 are basically the pen and paper used for the replica - some combinations make the replica look better than others, and x264 is just good for keeping quality during compression. H.265/x265 is the newer version, kind of like a newer version of paper that would make it even easier to keep details of the original. x265 is becoming very popular because it allows the encoders to keep the same or better amount of detail, into a smaller file size.

The trade off is that x265 video needs more power to play - meaning that your phone probably won't be able to play the file well, and even if it can, it'll be a big batter drain. For laptops though, where power isn't a issue for the most part, x265 is highly preferred.

If you have a 720p screen, then get 720p encodes. 1080p screen, then get 1080. 1080p won't look better than 720p if your screen can't go higher than 720p. Similarly, if you have a 1080p screen, 4k won't look any better than the maximum supported size - 1080p.

I used to use YIFY all the time. People complain a lot that he's getting more credit than he deserves, since his encodes don't really hold up with higher end (read: $400+ 60'') TV's. I felt they were great though, with small size to boot.

Now with the emergence of x265, Joybell is becoming a popular encoder, and AFAIK she's great for quality. Bonkai77 is my go to for anime as well. Hope this helped!

permalink

GECKOS and AC3 are source teams (they rip the content), while BvS and LOKY are primarily x265 encoders. Encoding basically involves interweaving frames and audio to save bytes, so the smaller the file is, the worse you'll get frame distortion and a heftier processor is needed to play it. Encoding teams choose to encode files at their own settings (personally, I err on encoding stuff at a higher bitrate than most teams do, but each to their own), based on whatever quality-to size ratio they're interested in.

Highest quality videos will likely be the 15gb-ers, as most teams don't like to post full BRRips, which hover around the 25gb-46gb mark. You probably won't notice the difference between a 4gb and a 15gb file unless you have a super-stellar TV with an absurd sound system, as most teams don't keep the 5.1 or 7.1 in the standard BRRIP, but put in a DOLBY ProLogic 2.1 track instead, which sounds pretty alright, all things considered.

permalink