Originally Posted by Steeb
I judge the movie quality based on how it looks when I'm watching it, not how it looks when it's paused. Maybe you enjoy your movies a frame at a time, but I don't. So yes, if the artifact is invisible during normal playback, I'd consider that a success.
Setting the bar low does not make this any more of a success. Do you think someone who encodes movies for a living would consider it a success?
In any case, I guess the following would be enough to call this a failure:
Originally Posted by pteittinen
Only after seeing these photos and knowing what to look for, did I see the blockiness when viewing a moving image. They are clearly visible in a freeze frame. Looks like an encoder futz-up for this particular scene.
Also people who are sensitive to artifacts will see this kind of think more readily than those who are not so sensitive.
And now we have secondary confirmation that the problem is real and can be seen by humans on moving pictures...
We have the right to know if the person feeding us information has a reason to lie.
Fair enough. But posting something that is fairly easily demonstrated to be accurate in a completely objective fashion could hardly be considered a lie regardless of the source. It is simply a presentation of how the encode is... nothing more.
If Amir backed up some of his statements with actual examples rather than "I know more than you do", "trust us we know this stuff", etc., I would be a happy man.