[CGI] New file source category needed [DONE]

Post by **PetriW** » Sat Aug 21, 2004 4:25 pm

All current source media assume it's been distributed either by tv or dvd (vhs etc etc). There needs to be a source "Web" for files ripped from webstreams, not too uncommon for previews after all.

Post by **exp** » Sat Aug 21, 2004 11:05 pm

added, we'll have to keep an eye on that one though.
some ppl might misunderstand it's meaning and add it for files which really should be of some other type.

BYe!
EXP

analogued · Post by **analogued** » Sun Aug 22, 2004 6:13 pm

exp is right... some people might interpret that as the source they got the file from. For example, the trailer for Kakurenbo was released on the official site but it's source is unknown (whatever the animation companies use to store the animation on... and I doubt it's DVDs). On the other hand, for the Mai-HiME trailers (the Shining-Fansubs ones), the source is www since the fansubbers used the web video streams as a source for their own encodes.

I just wrote this here in order to make the situation more clear as to what the www source should be used for... Hopefully, the people reading this won't make any mistakes.

permidion · Post by **permidion** » Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:34 am

but in the case of a game intro video, wouldnt the source be the CD ? there is at least 2 case like that in the db but actually they are set to Unknown.

analogued · Post by **analogued** » Mon Aug 23, 2004 12:15 pm

permidion wrote:but in the case of a game intro video, wouldnt the source be the CD ? there is at least 2 case like that in the db but actually they are set to Unknown.

You're right, but since there are very few such files I think that a new category for them would be unnecessary. Usually you can tell that the source was the game CD/DVD from the episode title. If you feel that's not enough you can always add a "Source: Game CD/DVD" to the comments field of that file.

Elberet · Post by **Elberet** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 11:14 am

Is it really that important, to distinguish between files downloaded directly from a website, files downloaded from a website and reencoded, and files taken from a CD (and possibly reencodet)? All these files came from digital, in other words lossless, media, so a source "Misc Digital" might be sufficient, and more details can be added in the file comments.

analogued · Post by **analogued** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:01 pm

Elberet wrote:All these files came from digital, in other words lossless, media

You're making a BIIIG confusion right there... Digital != Lossless

Elberet · Post by **Elberet** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:05 pm

The compression is lossy. But when I copy a (lossily encoded) video from one computer to another, there's no additional quality loss involved, while transferring the same file via VHS tapes would be very, very lossy.

analogued · Post by **analogued** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 1:53 pm

Well, the way you previously phrased that didn't make it very clear what you were trying to say.

Also, I don't think the current WWW category should be put together with the CD/DVD sources... Why? Because it's just so fundamentally different, from a distribution point of view (physical/non-physical), that it makes no sense to stick them together even though they are both digital... And besides, currently there are different categories for DVD, LD and HKDVD (which you have to admit are pretty similar) so I see no problem in having a category for web sources.

Also, in my first post, I was considering the source as "source for the encoders" (from the fansub group or companies). Hence the Kakurenbo/Mai-HiME example... I think this is the correct way of interpreting the source field since it would be consistent. There are, of course, other ways of interpreting it...

e.g. Also puting the Kakurenbo in the www source category, which would mean the source was for the downloader, not for the encoder. This is not very consistent but maybe the mods preffer this interpretation. That's why I would like to ask for some clarification from the mods in this matter.

wahaha · Post by **wahaha** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:02 pm

analogued wrote:e.g. Also puting the Kakurenbo in the www source category, which would mean the source was for the downloader, not for the encoder. This is not very consistent but maybe the mods preffer this interpretation. That's why I would like to ask for some clarification from the mods in this matter.

I, for one, don't really understand the problem yet - or maybe just the situation with Kakurenbo (can't view the entry ATM)... ^^;

If the trailer is/was available on the official site, that trailer's source is "web". Likewise if a fansub is based on this trailer.

analogued · Post by **analogued** » Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:00 pm

wahaha wrote:I, for one, don't really understand the problem yet - or maybe just the situation with Kakurenbo (can't view the entry ATM)... ^^;

This isn't Kakurenbo-speciffic... that was just an example.

wahaha wrote:If the trailer is/was available on the official site, that trailer's source is "web". Likewise if a fansub is based on this trailer.

I actually started writing a rather long answer, when I realised that it was all a matter of perspective... I was looking from a different POV at the problem (more like I was adding uneeded complexity to the problem). Your interpretation is also correct. I won't try to present my reasoning here since I don't see the point anymore (there's no disagreement) and because I'm sure it wouldn't turn out easy to understand due to english not being my native language.