Superbit vs Normal. Which gives better quality

[DJ Alik]

Hi.

I have rips of two different versions of "Snatch", the superbit and the regular one. Does anyone know if I will get better quality if I use the superbit version to convert it to DivX5.02 Any help would be appreciated.

[OvERaCiD23]

the Superbit one is encoded at a much higher bitrate, thus a better source, so theoretically it should compress better. the movie compresses well anyways, so the difference will likely be negligable.

[theReal]

the Superbit one is encoded at a much higher bitrate, thus a better source, so theoretically it should compress better.It could also compress worse because the higher bitrate version has more noise (but also more detail, of course).
I'd use the better source anyways - quality comes first, then compressibility :D

[JohnMK]

So then you must always do 3 CD rips?

[OvERaCiD23]

Originally posted by JohnMK
So then you must always do 3 CD rips?

where'd that come from? most movies fit on 2 CD w/ AC3 sound with over a 70% comptest. if that isn't quality to someone, they have issues.

[JohnMK]

Originally posted by OvERaCiD23
where'd that come from? most movies fit on 2 CD w/ AC3 sound with over a 70% comptest. if that isn't quality to someone, they have issues.

I'm just pointing out a fallacy in the previous poster's post, forget about it.

[theReal]

So then you must always do 3 CD rips? I didn't say I always want the most perfect quality.
OvERaCiD23 is right - a compress test with over 70% with a resolution higher than 640xnnn is what I call quality. I haven't had to use three CDs for that on any film yet (well, I guess Das Boot director's cut and LOTR I director's cut will need 3CDs, but most other movies would come out undersized if you aimed for 3CDs)