Amazon Fix: Some improvements on the download speed from Amazon videos.

[Brozilla]

I mean, it's still a re-encode and NOT a download
does this mean before the drm problem?

[smithbrad]

I mean, it's still an upscale and NOT a download
does this mean before the drm problem?

Once and for all, WOULD YOU PLEASE STOP SAYING UPSCALE WHEN IT IS A RE-ENCODE AT THE SAME RESOLUTION. You've been reminded of this many-many times now, but you continue to falsely represent what is truly going on. Not that what is going on is great, but better than what you are stating.

[Brozilla]

its not a reencode
its a screenrecord with encode

so if u use reencode i use upscale

[smithbrad]

its not a reencode
its a screenrecord with encode

so if u use reencode i use upscale

Whenever I see "upscale" it means moving up from a lower resolution to a higher resolution. In this case we are talking about a screen record that maintains the same resolution as the source. The very nature of a screen record requires an encode. No increase in resolution means no upscale.

[smithbrad]

its not a reencode
its a screenrecord with encode

so if u use reencode i use upscale

Re-encode just means to encode again. It doesn't matter whether the encoding is happening from a file or a screen recording, it is still a re-encode.

[Brozilla]

as i said before: as long as everyone here uses reencode i use upscale. both are wrong so either way it doesn't matter what you use

[smithbrad]

as i said before: as long as everyone here uses reencode i use upscale. both are wrong so either way it doesn't matter what you use

No, re-encode is a more accurate representation and upscale is very wrong given that no scaling has been done.

Look up the definition of re-encode, it means to simple encode again. The original file has been encoded. Playing back the video to recapture it requires decoding for playback and encoding to create a new file. The end result is that the original encoded file has been re-encoded. How is that so difficult to comprehend.

[NewMelle]

Being a noob a while back I had to look it up myself. Was a little fuzzy on re-encoding.

"Re-encoding refers to the process of changing the encoding settings of a media file without changing its format. This process is usually done to reduce the file size or change its quality."

"Upscaling refers to converting an image or video to a resolution higher than the original resolution."

Just to be sure I downloaded the same test movie in both 480p and 1080p and 1080p took longer so my guess is SF is "watching" the video at twice or more the normal speed then converting that into real time video. Definitely not a direct download. Definitely takes a lot longer. Sure pushes my old FX-6300 during the "processing" phase. NO, I have no plans to build a new computer. Rich f****s can afford that shit but I can't.

[AllNight]

as i said before: as long as everyone here uses reencode i use upscale. both are wrong so either way it doesn't matter what you use

If this guy is going to willingly spread misinformation and continue to say "upscale" instead of "reencode" then maybe he shouldn't be posting here? Just my opinion.

[Brozilla]

Reenconding is a missinformation
as i said before: its a streamrecord with encoding not a reencode from an encoded video

I also don't understand why people are moaning about it here.
Your wishes about what to say are off topic and have nothing to do with the topic

[Kattanders]

Just to be sure I downloaded the same test movie in both 480p and 1080p and 1080p took longer so my guess is SF is "watching" the video at twice or more the normal speed then converting that into real time video

I did theses tests as well. 480p (SD) is much smaller in frame size and also smaller filesize therefore download is faster and the following encoding as well (where as 480p normally still is a stream download without encoding - it would be the same filesize as the original size stated while downloading). The result is 480p (no upscale to 1080p).
The 1080p (HD) is much more data to download and for new DRM gets encoded by SF to H.264 (also if the codec of the stream is H.265) during processing - as the stream from the Provider is encryped and also encoded (video codec H.264 or H.265), the result by SF actually is a re-encoded video compared to the original video source). The filesize is likely 10-20% more that the original download but still 1080p.

Ecoding speed depends on codec, runtime and resolution, and whether it is hardware or software encoding. Based on SF speed it is software encoding. Hardware encoding to the more complex H.265 codec takes about 15 to 20 mins for my 5 year old PC. 40 mins processing in SF to just H.264 codec definitely is not hardware encoding.