Convert to AV1 format using ab-av1

frostycab

@ianfontinell Oooh! Spank you for taking the time to do that! Unfortunately, I can't seem to get it to work. I added TamponGibbon to Chrome and installed the script, but can't see that little shield icon anywhere even after Chrome had a full restart after a reboot. 100% user error, but no idea how to fix it.

ianfontinell

@frostycab now I'm curious if it might be the script, i never tested it in chrome. If I find something out I'll let you know.

ianfontinell

@frostycab alright i tried it on chrome, the browser has a new option now and the user has to enable userscripts on a per-extension basis, so you need to go right-click the extension button, click manage extension and then toggle "enable userscripts" on.

frostycab

@ianfontinell said:

@frostycab alright i tried it on chrome, the browser has a new option now and the user has to enable userscripts on a per-extension basis, so you need to go right-click the extension button, click manage extension and then toggle "enable userscripts" on.

Yup, that did the trick. Looks really good too. Nice and clean. I shall test over the coming days and let you know how I get on.

I never knew you could do stuff like this with scripts in a browser. What a shame I don't understand scripting!

Thank you!

ch3v4li3r

@ianfontinell Thank you for this. Those re-encodes are really annoying, and they're bad for retention since seeders end up being spread across multiple files. I also don't understand the point of re-encoding from one lossy source to another lossy format.

ianfontinell

@ch3v4li3r said:

@ianfontinell Thank you for this. Those re-encodes are really annoying, and they're bad for retention since seeders end up being spread across multiple files. I also don't understand the point of re-encoding from one lossy source to another lossy format.

I am re-encoding my collection as I speak so I know very well why people do it, and I know that it can be very annoying when those re-encodes are spammed all over the site non-stop, but AV1 is very CPU-intensive task that most people cannot choose to do if they ever want to.

At the very least, the person doing it is being quite mindful with their process, using software encoding and using automated bitrate testings to ensure quality loss is not terrible.

But I'll admit, if it wasn't for this script I would lose my shit

trueform

When in a hurry I like to filter out the search with a similar list , -av1 -ai -enhanced -starlight -omegle etc

then when bored ill browse without the filter , like freeleach - the av1's can be a handy way to resurface random stuff I may not have seen yet that is popular as someone put the effort in to recode / freeleach

Joker

Hi all,

thanks for the long and useful discussion. The duplicate rule is now clear on the rules page (Uploading Rules, in effect since 10 October): same video, same resolution and less than 10% size difference is a duplicate, whatever the container. A new upload of the same video only counts as not a duplicate if it adds something to the video itself: a higher resolution, embedded subtitles or an extra audio track, named in the description.

So an AV1 (or any other) re-encode of a video we already have, in the same resolution and with nothing added, is a duplicate, even if the file is much smaller. If you want to save space, re-encoding for yourself is fine, but please do not upload it next to the original.

https://www.gaytor.rent/rules.php

Joker

ianfontinell

@Joker said:

Hi all,

thanks for the long and useful discussion. The duplicate rule is now clear on the rules page (Uploading Rules, in effect since 10 October): same video, same resolution and less than 10% size difference is a duplicate, whatever the container. A new upload of the same video only counts as not a duplicate if it adds something to the video itself: a higher resolution, embedded subtitles or an extra audio track, named in the description.

So an AV1 (or any other) re-encode of a video we already have, in the same resolution and with nothing added, is a duplicate, even if the file is much smaller. If you want to save space, re-encoding for yourself is fine, but please do not upload it next to the original.

https://www.gaytor.rent/rules.php

Joker

Nobody asked but I am against this rule, different size should not count as duplicate because it makes no sense and there is no reason whatsoever for this, people can use their own discretion to decide what they want to download while not everyone can or know how to re encode.

Those AV1 encodes for example, I cannot make them myself as they require at least a 40 series GPU.

Kevin4fm

@ianfontinell There does seem to be a contradiction here: "... less than 10% size difference" then it's considered a duplicate, yet "...even if the file is much smaller." is also given as a duplicate example.

Personally 10% sounds too small, but I won't quibble. Certainly, I'd like to be able to choose between a 1080p file that 2GB and one that's 1GB.

Joker

@Kevin4fm fair point, it reads like a contradiction, but it is two different cases:

Same encode: the same file in another container (MP4 or MKV) or with a slightly different mux. Those stay within 10% of each other, and that is what the 10% is for: it shows it is the same encode.
Re-encode: the same video encoded again (for example to AV1) in the same resolution with nothing added. That is a duplicate too, whatever the size, because the video is still the same, usually with some quality lost.

So the 10% is a sign for "same file", not a free pass for anything smaller. The same 1080p video in 2 GB and in 1 GB is a duplicate; a 720p or a 2160p version of it is not. I have passed the wording on, so the rules page can say this more clearly.

@ianfontinell understood, and thanks for saying it openly. The reason behind the rule: one good copy per video keeps the seeders together, every smaller copy next to it splits the swarm and usually ends up half seeded. Re-encoding for yourself is fine, just not as a second upload next to the original.

Kevin4fm

@Joker Understood. But my point was that when downloading a 1080p file, I would appreciate the choice between 1GB and 2GB.

That seems to me to be a far more likely consideration for downloaders than whether a file is .mov, .wmv, .mkv, etc. as it directly affects how much local storage is required and (perceived) quality.

ianfontinell

@Joker said:
@ianfontinell understood, and thanks for saying it openly. The reason behind the rule: one good copy per video keeps the seeders together, every smaller copy next to it splits the swarm and usually ends up half seeded. Re-encoding for yourself is fine, just not as a second upload next to the original.

Thank you answering but that reasoning only made everything worse, because what you are suggesting is that everybody HAS to download the high bitrate/inefficient encode and re-encode for their own. Instead of splitting the swarms your suggestion is killing the swarm altogether because the people who could be seeding their re encodes are basically forbidden from doing so.

Nobody will download a 200GB torrent, re encode it an keep both copies just to keep the swarm alive.

ianfontinell

Another example following that logic is forbidding any alternative resolution altogether, let everyone downscale to their needs so that we keep only one source file.

And what about the upscale frenzy, what will be of those videos? They also achieve the same theoretical outcome of splitting swarms.

Joker

Hi all, thanks for keeping at this. You make a fair point, so we are changing the rule.

From now on a re-encode into a more efficient format counts as its own upload, not a duplicate, as long as it genuinely saves space. Same video, smaller file thanks to a better codec (AV1, HEVC and so on) is welcome as a separate torrent. Two things keep it tidy:

put the codec in the title, for example "AV1", so the versions are easy to tell apart
keep a link to the original in the description

As a rule of thumb the re-encode should be clearly smaller, roughly a third or more. A copy that only swaps the container or adds nothing still counts as a duplicate under the 10 percent rule.

On the idea of a 1GB and a 2GB option per resolution: noted, I like it, I will see what we can do.

Thanks, Joker

Kevin4fm

@Joker This is off-topic as far as the original point of the post, but as it has moved into a wider discussion of duplicates, I thought it worth raising to see if it's an angle worth thinking about now - if ever - if the governing rules are being updated:

Now and then I come across a scene that just has a really "bad" title: e.g. "White twink fucked hard by BBC". Maybe the uploader genuinely didn't know the proper details, or was trying a sneaky duplicate.

After downloading, I realize it's actually "Staxus - Monster Cock Island - Devon Lebron & David Hanson". If this torrent already exists, it's a no-brainer - the badly titled one is removed as a duplicate and balance is restored to the world. But if it's uploaded afterwards, technically it's a duplicate so should be the one to be removed. However, this latter one will be far easier to find for anyone looking, and it's not reasonable to expect the second uploader to have identified the first before uploading.

Should both remain, or one be deleted? If one should, which stays? My vote would be for the one that is titled correctly, even if it comes later. If nothing else, this would encourage uploaders to use use a scene's proper information. If the second has to be the one to go, is there a way the title of the first could be corrected so that it shows up in searches, etc.? Otherwise it's a reasonable expectation that it's going to keep being uploaded again by people, after searching for the scene and finding that - to all intents and purposes - it's not already here.

I appreciate that this gets as messy as file sizes and file types, but thought it worth adding to the mix to at leasy consider, even if the conclusion is "too complicated, leave well alone!"