Sons of Anarchy S01E02 DSR SUCKS ReadNFO XviD-2HD

pretty much yeah....
dsr < sdtv < pdtv* < hdtv < (720p/hr)^

* pdtv is still sd but no analog to digital conversion, so is often 'cleaner'.
^ not sure once you get past hdtv, i don't go there 🙂

last week the dsr release came out (with the group saying they wouldn't bother
in future if another group was going to cap in hdtv on a regular basis but would
be prepared just in case) and a few hours later a hdtv release came out.

this week the dsr was captured but not released. the group waited 12 hours past
last weeks hdtv release then released their dsr. whether the hdtv release will
come out is anyones guess.

as an egalitarian (except in matters of religion, being an atheistic heathen i
have no time for that rubbish), i find @solds post refreshing, likewise
@mdntdncr. that said i have to take issue with some of the vitriolic excrement
evident in this thread.

@dalezer: gotta love the notion that you feel superior, given that you can't
actually spell it. how proud your ancestors would be.

@demondiablo: anthropology, evolution and dna all point to africa being the
birth place of humanity, so essentially we're all african. get over it.

and @monkeybusiness: i'm from the lake district, which is probably the whitest
area of england you could imagine. that, however, does not make me a racist
thug. grab hold of your throat, tightly, with both hands, tug sharply and you
might just manage to drag your head out of your arse you pointless south african
twat.

edit:

oh, and @quickmemo, just so you don't feel left out. yes this is a torrent
site, but as far as threads are concerned, as long as you adhere to the rules of
the site you're free to say whatever you like. you preachy little bitch.

@rt42 my ancestors couldn't care less, their native language isn't english.
lol. :d what they would be proud of is the fact that i can speak,read & write
in 3 langauges very fluently and the fact that i am proud of my origin &
practice certain traditions despite the fact that i don't live there anymore.

plus who cares about my a "i" vs "e" single letter typo. it not like this is a
term paper or a professional report for my employer. i didn't read it over,
plain and simple. i have nothing to lose if i make a typo mistake here.

well how about this in some good old fashioned plain english:

spell check function.

incidentally, just how ignorant were your ancestors that they would be proud
that you can speak?:)

and yes i know i'm simply being pedantic, but fuck it, why not?

edit:

oh, and by the way "i" for "o" or "i" for "u" is a typo. "i" for "e" is just
just a fuck up, pure and simple.

quite obviously your fluency doesn't extend to the english language.

what are you talking about? there's no sdtv release format. both pdtv and dsr are from sd sources. but
dsr comes from a lower bitrate source and goes through an analogue generation which results in even
lower quality. although it's not supposed to go through analogue at all. or so is my understanding.

and the answer to the original question is yes, it's lower res than sd, but so is every release that isn't
720p (or hr).

here in the uk, sd (standard definition) is still considered to be analogue.

pdtv (pure digital), and dsr (d as in digital) are, strangely enough, digital.

and then, of course, we have our occasional hd (high definition) channels.

sd < pdtv < hdtv

now maybe, @satabbj, that's not how you perceive tv reception, but from where
i'm sitting there is nothing lower res than sd.

granted a lot of people seem to be getting confused over sd and pd, but reading
your post the phrase "arse over tit" leaps readily to mind.

@rt42

wtf are you like the grammar police or something? since when are forums
considered a place for proper writing. why do you think that my few forum
posts are a representative sample of my literacy?

fyi. i grew up in a english speaking country, english is my strongest &
primary langauge. i also grauduated from a english speaking university & have
written countless papers on many many different subjects in english.

so as far as i'm concerned, i have proven my literacy.

grammar police: no.

having said that, i'm not the one bragging about my skills as a polyglot, am i?

many many papers? you would appear to have graduated from the same university
as the writers of the police academy films.

lol. you're lame.

bragging no.
responding to your lame misrepresentations, yes.

fyi. i'm not a writer. lol

as far as quality goes(in my opinion):

in layman's terms, to answer your question, it is not hd quality but it is still
watchable. it is the same quality as first episode available on here.

in my opinion, the quality is not great but good. definitely still watchable.

carl

i'm not sure if you were trying to be insulting then or not, but i'll assume you weren't.

pdtv is a scene-only term for a rip from an sd source that hasn't suffered generation loss. in other
words you'll never see a release labelled 'show.name.s01e01.sdtv.xvid-grp'.

sdtv usually refers to digital tv with 480 or 576 lines of resolution, it can refer to analogue tv but as a
general rule does not. most of what's featured on this site is well below 480 lines, which is by definition
sub-sd. even lower resolution than what appears here is ldtv (low definition television). this includes
things such as vcd, vhs, old video game consoles, and ipod video. not to sound condescending or
insulting, but check out wikipedia's definitions for more popular/standard definitions (almost a pun,
heh) than what you seem to have.

@satanbj: you assumed correctly. i wasn't attempting to insult you, although i
have been informed that i am sarcastic by nature. that, however, is besides the
point.

the definitions (no pun intended, or should be inferred) i proffered were simply
from the viewing perspective which, given that tv is a visual medium, seems to
me to be a sensible baseline rather than relying on the technical.

all sarcasm aside i think we could all benefit from a standard lexicon of
abbreviations, as opposed to ridiculously long file names and additional nfo.

edit:

please don't suggest wikipedia as source for standard definitions. it quite
simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny, especially at an international level.

arguing the merits or lack thereof of wikipedia gets tiresome quickly, but for general articles of a
technical or scientific nature, especially things that typically geeky internet users read/edit, it is pretty
accurate.

by all means do your own research instead if you want (or don't), but in this case i think you'll find what's
on wikipedia to be common to other sites.

all this tripe witless banter and only a few of you actually said anything
regarding the thread topic.

thanks for the info on the quality. the rest of you can die in a fire.

and will you be the one rounding us all up, oberleutnant von fuckwit?