Talk:High-resolution high-definition
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Inaccurate
editThis article is completely inaccurate. HRHD NEVER refers to "half res." The acronym, which originates from the scene, is "High Resolution High Definition." This is the case because many of the HRHD rips come from 720p source and half res in that case would be 640x360. Further, there are HR.PDTV (also from the scene) rips which obviously cannot be half resolution, since the original resolution of PDTV content is somewhere around 720x(576/480).
Why it's not Half-Resolution
editHR.HD is not Half-Resolution because it's not always half of the source resolution, in the cases of a 1080i source the output resolution will be approximatley half of the input resolution however in the case of a 720p source the output resolution will be the same 960x544 (approximately, it is always 960x however the horizontal resolution may change within a 5% allowance to provide clean cropping), which is not Half. The term High refers to the fact that this resolution is significalty higher resolution than the normal 350MB scene caps. AdamJacobMuller 04:18, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- Half-Resolution is a standard; wether its actually 1/2 of the original broadcast resolution is irrelavent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.89.219 (talk • contribs) 2006-03-31 01:51:10
- Half-Resolution is what standard? who defined it and who follows a standard called Half Resolution High Defintion There is no one. Saying something is Half Resolution implies that it is in fact half the resolution of the source, which is not always true of HRHD simply by definition. AdamJacobMuller 23:12, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Why it IS Half Resolution
editHRHD files used to have 1080i broadcasts as their source. While videophiles preferred the original 1080i stream, many people actually wanted smaller files with a reduction in resolution. Here's where HRHD comes in, it halves both the horizontal and the vertical resolution of the video. This makes 960x540 out of an 1920x1080 stream. Of course, regarding the whole picture this is actually quarter resolution, but to avoid confusion it's called half resolution.
Nowadays broadcasters use 720P too. But HRHD became more or less a 'standard' in that it means 960x540. So HRHD from a 720P source is still 960x540. Though your right in saying that use is not entirely correct.
The rippers releasing HR.PDTV encodes obviously made the mistake of thinking HR means High Resolution. This is not 'proof' for HR meaning High Resolution, however. MrTroy 09:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
- The TV ripping scene is very organized. It is not a mistake that the same term is used for HRHD rips that come from 1080i and 720p sources. Further, it is not a mistake that HR.PDTV rips are labelled as such. The source of the term is that the original tv-xvid rips were approximately 640x352. In relation to these rips, the 960x5XX rips are 'high resolution.' Your argument talks of videophiles which is completely unrelated to this discussion; these terms come from the organized tv ripping scene, not 'videophiles.' Additionally, your point about the rips actually being 1/4th res further supports the 'high res' argument. ig88b 14:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- Videophiles aren't unrelated to this discussion. They are the reason 1080i tv-rips files are distributed. If you've ever been to a filesharing website you know that there are always people who despise the HRHD rips, and only want original 1080i streams. Those are the people I call videophiles. Furthermore, HR was originally a term exclusively for HD material. That "the scene" at some point decided to release HR.PDTV rips too, doesn't tell us much about the original meaning of HR.
- Another argument I can think of is that HD BitTorrent sites make a difference between '1080i', '720p', and 'HRHD'. If HRHD would mean high resolution, it would be an unnecessary category, because 720p and 1080i are high res too. MrTroy 17:42, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- This is not about 'filesharing websites' or 'bittorrent sites.' The files do not originate from these places, they originate from The Scene. You obviously know nothing about this. The term means 'high resolution,' there should not even be an argument. Just like the terms TS, TC, mean telesync and telecine, HR means high resolution.ig88b 22:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- There's no such thing as "the" scene. It's just a name for all organized movie/music ripping groups. Indeed, some of these groups use websites to distribute their stuff. Saying that I obviously know nothing about this, is a stupid reductio ad hominem, and furthermore, it's not true. On top of all, you yourself haven't given a single argument why it is high resolution. You only keep repeating that there shouldn't be a discussion about this. MrTroy 08:11, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
- I'll try to be as clear and concise as possible and address all of your claims. First, RE: 'There's no such thing as "the" scene.' This is absolutely untrue. Read the wikipedia article about 'the scene' that I linked above if you're unsure. Second, the argument about why it doesn't mean 'half resolution' is very simple. Half-resolution does not make since. The origin of the files is a HDTV source, which could either be 1080i or 720p. Since half of a 720p (1280x720 source) release is not 960x540, the term 'half resolution' does not make sence. Third, the bulk of your argument seems to be based on that the original rips were from a 1080i source and thus set a precedent. However, the HDTV standard originally included both 1080i and 720p formats. One did not come before the other. Further, broadcasters have been using both standards equally as long. Since both 1080i and 720p have been around for the same amount of time, your argument saying the 1080i-source rips created a precedent for a standard is not valid. --Ig88b 01:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
- ig88b is entirely correct here, HRHD refers to "High Resolution High Defention" and refers to a higher resolution video cap from a high defeniton video source. you also seem to be mistaken in a few other points, so let me make some things clear. 'the scene' does not consist of some random grouping of bit torrent websites. It does in fact, not use bit torrent at all. (I'm not going to go into speculation about the scene here -- I don't know what it really is and i'm not involved in it in any way -- not that I would admit it if I was) but, there are policies and procedures defined that state what HRHD is, it's not half resolution, it's high resolution. I would love to cite a webpage or article that backed me up on this definitively, but for obvious reasons. I cannot. So I will provide you with a few bits of evidence and perhaps this will explain things to you in a way you will understand. First: The Google Test
- I'll try to be as clear and concise as possible and address all of your claims. First, RE: 'There's no such thing as "the" scene.' This is absolutely untrue. Read the wikipedia article about 'the scene' that I linked above if you're unsure. Second, the argument about why it doesn't mean 'half resolution' is very simple. Half-resolution does not make since. The origin of the files is a HDTV source, which could either be 1080i or 720p. Since half of a 720p (1280x720 source) release is not 960x540, the term 'half resolution' does not make sence. Third, the bulk of your argument seems to be based on that the original rips were from a 1080i source and thus set a precedent. However, the HDTV standard originally included both 1080i and 720p formats. One did not come before the other. Further, broadcasters have been using both standards equally as long. Since both 1080i and 720p have been around for the same amount of time, your argument saying the 1080i-source rips created a precedent for a standard is not valid. --Ig88b 01:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
- There's no such thing as "the" scene. It's just a name for all organized movie/music ripping groups. Indeed, some of these groups use websites to distribute their stuff. Saying that I obviously know nothing about this, is a stupid reductio ad hominem, and furthermore, it's not true. On top of all, you yourself haven't given a single argument why it is high resolution. You only keep repeating that there shouldn't be a discussion about this. MrTroy 08:11, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
- This is not about 'filesharing websites' or 'bittorrent sites.' The files do not originate from these places, they originate from The Scene. You obviously know nothing about this. The term means 'high resolution,' there should not even be an argument. Just like the terms TS, TC, mean telesync and telecine, HR means high resolution.ig88b 22:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- High Resolution High Definition == 318 Results
- Half Resolution High Definition == 20 results, 5 non-dups, (one of which is the redirect on wikipedia)
The only non-wikipedia outside source I can find is this: [1] and it's hardly definitive. Please do not attempt lame tricks like adding things saying that it's disuputed to an article to attempt to inflate your position.
- Perhaps you don't know the meaning of the disputeabout template. It means that the wikipedians are having a dispute about the article on the Discussion page. Since this is obviously a dispute, placing the template was entirely valid. You can call that 'attempting lame tricks', but all the same you are using the Google test as evidence (maybe you want to read the WP article about Google test to understand why it isn't valid). Furthermore, using demeaning remarks like "in a way you will understand" actually tells us more about you then about me. MrTroy 09:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
- Here is a little bit more evidence supporting high resolution high definition from the creators of the format: [2]
- CTU is the member of the continuum dedicated to bringing you High
- Resolution XviD TV rips (HR.HDTV/PDTV). HR HDTV is a format originated by
- us in 2003, under our former group name of FUA. HR HDTV is defined by us as
- the following:
- Here is a little bit more evidence supporting high resolution high definition from the creators of the format: [2]
- Perhaps you don't know the meaning of the disputeabout template. It means that the wikipedians are having a dispute about the article on the Discussion page. Since this is obviously a dispute, placing the template was entirely valid. You can call that 'attempting lame tricks', but all the same you are using the Google test as evidence (maybe you want to read the WP article about Google test to understand why it isn't valid). Furthermore, using demeaning remarks like "in a way you will understand" actually tells us more about you then about me. MrTroy 09:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
- - HDTV source (1920*1088,29.97i or 1280*720,59.94p)
- - 960x528 WS resolution
- - untouched AC3 audio
- - sized to fit 1 1-hour episode or 2 30 minute episodes per CD
- --Ig88b 03:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was No consensus. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Requested move
editHigh Resolution High Definition → HRHD – HRHD is a term that has more meanings than High Resolution High Definition alone; see article. MrTroy 13:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Survey
editAdd "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Oppose. This article is at the correct name. The problem may be that the extra material should be split out into a second article. If that is done, then HRHD could become a dab. Vegaswikian 16:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - Saying high resolution is the "correct" explanation is actually quite POV. Apart from that, splitting it into two articles would create two articles with basically the same text, but with different explanations of the acronym. If we'd do that, there would be a merge proposal in no time. MrTroy 17:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- Given that 'High Resolution High Definition' pulls up 375 hits on google and most of them seem to be for other users, it would appear that renaming might not be wise. It might be better to get the article(s) written correctly and then decide. My comment above is based on the article title matching the name used in the article. From the reading I have done, the use of the term does not seem to be fixed. That could mean the article is not encylopedic and should be deleted. Vegaswikian 05:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - Saying high resolution is the "correct" explanation is actually quite POV. Apart from that, splitting it into two articles would create two articles with basically the same text, but with different explanations of the acronym. If we'd do that, there would be a merge proposal in no time. MrTroy 17:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Discussion
editAdd any additional comments
- While this appears to be the main definition of HDHR, this is the correct name so it probably belongs here. Given that there is another use that is actually included in this article says that some of the other uses may get articles. Don't know if that will ever happen. HDHR could be a redirect and the two topics listed here should be split and dab to each other for the time being. Vegaswikian 16:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The Slow Revert War
edit- Alright everybody -- last year we had a debate and there was No Consensus -- that means that there is currently not enough opinion to change HRHD to 'Half Resolution'. I know there is a contingent of users that are making changes to 'Half Resolution'... but I don't think making changes like this one where the person comments:
corrected from High to Half Resolution, even if some n00bs call it High Resolution, it means HALF RESOLUTION!
- calling people who are making the changes 'n00bs' isn't going to resolve the situation any. If you want to comment on why it should be half resolution please feel free to add your attitudes here. MrMacMan 01:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- In my opinion the link given above settles the matter: http://nforce.nl/index.php?switchto=nfos&menu=quicknav&item=viewnfo&id=83686
This clearly states that HR means "High Resolution", and it is from the most reliable source possible; The people who made up the term. It is clearly High Resolution. Clq 20:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- In my opinion the link given above settles the matter: http://nforce.nl/index.php?switchto=nfos&menu=quicknav&item=viewnfo&id=83686
Categories
editThe article clearly needs another category, reflecting that this is a computer file format. I don't know the technology well enough to decide what works, though. Possibilities: Category:Computer file formats, Category:Video codecs, Category:Standards.--Srleffler 01:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- It's not a file format and it's not a video codec. I guess Category:Standards is the only one that fits. It seems that "HR HDTV" is the term that's most used, by the way, so shouldn't that be the article name? Davhorn 12:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- After looking around a few other related articles, the ones that seem to best fit would be Category:Standards and perhaps Category:Warez. If no objections, I'll add these to the article. Ig88b 20:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)