Obligatory Response



Thanks Daiz. Drop in for a beer sometime.

Edit: Seems the offending post is now gone. Returning to normal business.

Thanks again to Daiz who, by some cosmic miracle, left the tab with the post open.

Posted by RHExcelion under International Politics | Permalink

56 Responses to “Obligatory Response”

  1. newfag says:

    you could stop trolling and start subbing

    ps moar drama plz

  2. shio says:

    nais. <3 coalgirls for trying to justify their shit releases :<

  3. random dude says:

    coalgirls? meh

  4. EpicNaruto says:

    Wow, quite the dorama that starting from asking a simple question lol.

  5. PLH says:

    Less having opinions, more working on releases.

  6. RJ says:

    “Sorry, nothing found!”

    “Sorry, nothing found!”


  7. Sean says:

    Yeah, them links’re gone now.

    You silly little children with your silly little kindergarten dramas. Post when you got something srs to say.

  8. gangler says:

    yeah, seems to be taken down. Where can I go to get this story?

  9. hello says:

    Any screenshot of the page and comment before it was removed?

  10. Windridge says:

    i dont pay you guys to be trolling!

  11. hey says:

    Just a friendly heads up for those unable to figure out on their own,

  12. Brett says:

    House of Five Leaves Batch?

    • Stove says:

      We were working on it ;_; then Tiggerz went MIA, been gone for 13 days now. Tiggerz if you see this: PLEASE COME BACK

  13. Qc says:

    so lets see some releases its going to be long enough as it is since ill have to wait for v2 of a bunch a of crap anyways

  14. outlaw says:

    Interesting. I find it odd that Coalgirls tries to defend their file size bloating. I enjoy their releases, but it’s pretty well known that Coalgirls make the file sizes much too large.

  15. Baka says:

    lol, i’m pretty much sure both groups have each other’s work archived in their own hdd. Bunch of hypocrites…

    • IGChris says:

      I can say for sure that I don’t have any of Coalgirls’ work on my hdd. Or if I do, it’s just because I’m keeping it around for comparison because of how bad it is, and I haven’t run low on space quite yet.

    • johnny_dickpants says:

      My computer cant play jewray, so I can say 100% I don’t have any of their shit on here.

  16. wadauo says:

    am i the only one who found the whole red/yellow thing funny?

    • Dickwad says:

      I have absolutely no idea what is wrong with red on yellow. I’d love for someone to post some typography research in the field because I find it quite fucking easy to read.
      Red on blue sucks hard though.

  17. fvdf says:

    “From the top of the thread, and RHExcelion’s post, it seems that this entire “project” of his was made to troll me. And yet, he completely failed, and wound up using it to post OPs/EDs. And he still tried to give my group a bad name by his failure of a troll.
    Protip: If you don’t put out the results to troll with, you look like nothing more than a whiny faggot.”

    I think they need to google what troll means, because from the response i’d say it was a successful troll.

  18. Not Anonymous says:

    She mad.

  19. ar says:

    .quote add By either the state or city laws, I was eligible to join a retarded preschool for free

    This classic comedy is courtesy to you of Kristen aka Coalgirls, not including his/her merry men of course.

  20. gulag says:

    Okay what the fuck. We all know Coalgirls likes to troll about the file sizes (releasing 4.4Gb movies? That’s trolling you to use a DL DVD for just 0.1Gb).

    That said, less pointless drama and more releases, plox.

    • Dickwad says:

      Oh, hi.
      Burning your animu on DVD died a couple of years ago because HDDs are cheaper and faster and you should watch your animu on your computer anyway.
      That is all.

      • fdfdsfdsfds says:

        I still burn to dvd was well as having an entire HDD backup because I’m fucking hardcore like that. The 2nd HDD isn’t even in my computer in case of floods it is up high in a closet until I do my monthly mirror. (There has never been a flood where I live, I don’t even live near any bodies of water). Losing an entire HDD is worse than losing a DVD or two.

        That being said, DVDs are cheap as fuck so who cares about wasting space.

  21. telepathy says:

    lol @ coalgirls having to take their original post down just cause they lost.

  22. newfag says:

    nearly a week now, srsly?

  23. yoo says:

    did you guys drop Nurarihyon no Mago??

  24. thesisidiot says:

    Coalgirls is faggot.

  25. Anonno says:

    You do realize gg and coalgirls are overpopulated by a bunch of very bitchy females right?

    If you really wanted to piss them off you could have just told them some teeny bop singer was gay or twilight is stupid.

  26. Katz says:

    err.. where’s the new release btw

  27. Cydonia says:

    Any idea on how long put your guns on ep 7 will be out?

  28. ffs says:

    god this is funny.

    coalgirls want to claim they do quality and care anything about file size ? BS. best quality for file size is 2 pass encoding. using a low crf means you are doing a lazy ass 1 pass encode and not giving a damn about size or max bitrate etc(which can effect playability on some hardware players, not PC).

    ye fansubbers are not pros but jeez talk about not having a clue and spouting off as if they do.

    • thesisidiot says:

      Sure you know how crf works, right? And how 2pass encodes works?

      • ffs says:

        actually yes i do know how crf and 2 pass both work.

        i am a member on several a/v forums and have worked on commercial releases(encoding side). i have also worked software side(video encoders) with both commercial and open source.

        crf is better than a traditional 1 pass encode but it is not better than a 2 pass encode if care anything about target size. look at the size of some of the coalgirls releases some time. they dont have to be that big and still be good quality.

        try reading up some time on how these things actually work and you may understand. otherwise its best not to comment and show your ignorance.

        • Anonymous says:

          What’s wrong with targeting a certain quality instead of a file size?

          • DmonHiro says:

            Because in videos, the necessary bit rate is not constant. Some scenes, like high speed action, require more bit rate, while static shots of people talking require much less. If you use the bit rate needed for a high speed action scene on a static talking scene, you are pointlessly increasing the file size. You gain no benefit, but the size increases. I don’t know how to explain that any simpler.

          • Anonymous says:

            DmonHiro, I cannot seem to reply directly to your post.

            I was talking about crf, not cbr. I just wondered why ffs would prefer 2 pass encoding over crf so much.

          • DmonHiro says:

            Oh, my bad, I though you were talking about constant bit rate, not crf. Well, crf and 2pass are in a way the same algorithm, but 2pass will be restricted by the imputed file size. Problem in, when you use a CRF rating that’s too low, you get the same result as if you set an absurdly high CBR. It’s easy to just go with CRF 13 for everything, but with a little testing, you might see that CRF 17 would have given the same quality, but much smaller size.

          • ffs says:

            you will note i also said if you care anything about size.

            just encoding everything at a low crf can indeed give good results/quality but at the cost of unneeded size(as DmonHiro mentioned).

            using 2-pass will try to distribute the bitrate through the file where its needed. crf tries to do similar by frame but with no real limit on the end size.

            hope thats clear in this small space. :)

        • Daiz says:

          2-pass is NOT better than CRF. The only thing you get from using 2-pass is that you know the filesize beforehand, and that’s it. And changes are that you are much worse at guessing the optimal filesize for the encode than if you were to test out CRF values to find the highest one that satisfies your visual quality requirement.

          The only thing that could potentially be better than CRF is doing CRF as the first pass and then doing a second pass with the CRF bitrate, but in that case the improvements are most likely placebo.

          To quote Dark_Shikari, an x264 developer, who knows quite a bit more about x264 than you do:

          #x264 @ Freenode, 25th of February, 2010:
          [17:43:35] [vlt] Hello. I want to encode some videos to h.264/avc. I don’t care for an _exact_ file size or bitrate, so I’d use “–crf”. Is it always better to use multipass encoding, i. e. will a multipass encoded video w/ the same _avg_ bitrate look better than the crf-encoded one?
          [17:44:41] [Dark_Shikari] vlt: no it won’t
          [17:44:48] [Dark_Shikari] within margin of error.
          [17:44:51] [Dark_Shikari] last test I did, crf won slightly

          You can still care about filesize with CRF by doing test encodes to find the highest satisfactory CRF value to use for the full encode. That way you’ll get the smallest filesize for the visual quality you are looking. Doing 2-pass with a smaller bitrate than what this kind of encode would have will obviously fail in visual quality compared to the CRF encode, because it has lower bitrate. On the other, you might have also picked a higher bitrate, in which case you’re just wasting bitrate.

          Long story short, CRF > 2-pass, constant filesize = stupid.

          • Dickwad says:

            Nowadays CRF uses the same algorithm as 2pass so you won’t even get better results if you do a two pass with the same bitrate as the CRF yields.

          • Daiz says:

            That’s exactly what I said. I said the only thing potentially better might be 2-pass WHERE THE FIRST PASS IS A CRF ENCODE WITH THE INTENDED SETTINGS, and then you do the second pass with the same settings and the final bitrate from the CRF pass. And I also said that most likely the “improvement” is placebo in this case. In other words, you should always use CRF, unless you for some arbitrary reason need to restrict your file to a certain size.

  29. ffs says:

    ye ye whatever. i have known dark shikari on forums since he started working on x264 and know how much of a wank he can be.

    but hey obviously you guys dont know how to read thats for sure. try reading again and see how i say just encoding at a low crf. thats what coalgirls do.

    sure if you want to do a heap of encodes at different crf values you can get good quality with a saner size too but doing 2 pass is usually the faster way if you know what you want.

    as for if you need to restrict your file size, well hell just encode to lossless h264 and be done with it. hey according to you file size doesnt matter right.

    bah wont bother with this nonsense any more.