This is the good stuff!

Is the DC different from normal version? I already have a normal version but if the difference is good enough I would like to grab this

> Is the DC different from normal version? I already have a normal version but if the difference is good enough I would like to grab this Director's Cut had more footage versus the standard. https://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=1391239

Could you do a batch for the monogatari series.

Thanks

If I re-encode it to x264 10bit (no filter or encode config changes), the re-encode will be better than this one or not? The re-encode will be the same of the encode from the same BDMV source at x264 10bit or not? Maybe no one reply it, but ok...

@Ahmad_o ok, you yourself asked for it > https://nyaa.iss.one/view/1108534

@Kamyne If you want to encode in x264-10, then it is better to do it from the BDMV-source. The process of simple encoding in hi@10 will not bring magic results. To achieve the desired result, you still have to select coding parameters and filters. I do not use filters because it is important for me to get a result close to the source.

Kewl

@ReinForce Yes, but I not have the BDMV-source. I think do re-encode at hi10 from your encode could be the same as do encode at hi10 from the source, because your encode is like untouched. But if x264 < x264-10, so I don't know if doing re-encode from your encode will result in an real good hi10 encode, but maybe yes?

>I do not use filters because it is important for me to get a result close to the source. @ReinForce And that’s why ReinForce encodes are the best. :)

>I think do re-encode at hi10 from your encode could be the same as do encode at hi10 from the source, because your encode is like untouched. But if x264 < x264-10, so I don’t know if doing re-encode from your encode will result in an real good hi10 encode, but maybe yes? @Kamyne People who do not know any better use re-encode interchangeable. Re-encode should be defined as making an encode all over again from scratch as a replacement for an already existing release, from the same uploader, based on high quality source files because of improvements in coding parameters that were refined over time, or better source that came out in later years. These source files are BDMV, or DVDISO if BD do not exist. Some people coin that term differently as making an encode based on an already existing encode. This definition is wrong, and should not even exist because it is an absolute waste of time and resource. Quality loss already resulted from the first encode. Why would you want further quality loss by encoding from an already lossy encode? Always encode from source to get the best possible quality from the start. Quality loss is almost always the result for an encode if your goal is to lower file size. How much quality preserved while lowering file size is dependent on the encoder’s skill in picking the best settings and parameters. Never make an encode from an existing Rip! P.S: Also, never use filters either! Encodes, in my opinion, should be to closely match original source quality while lowing size as much as possible. What’s the point in altering an original piece of art? The original creator wanted you to perceive it the way that he/she saw it. But because you altered it into what you think looks better, his/her perspective is lost. At least make a high quality replica while you’re at it. If the source had an artifact, leave it there. It wasn’t your mistake, so don’t try to correct it. I hate it when people try to paint over another’s art piece.

Thanks a lot :)

please seed

Could someone seed this please? Thanks in advance.

Thank you!

Please seed

Please seed

thanks, completed