No.11
Board Rules - Read this
1. Don't violate global rules.
2. Any porn is allowed.
3. Ask for sauce and request in the Sauce Thread/Request thread ( >>46316 ). Making new threads for either will be deleted. Starting a thread without posting at least some content beyond the OP will be considered a request thread and will be treated as such.
4. Don't advertise unless you ask for permission first.
5. Got complaints or suggestion post them in this thread. Meta stuff outside of it will be deleted.
Post OC webms here
If you don't know how to make webms yet check the guide.
Post last edited at
No.29391
I've compared VP9 vs. H265 for a typical porn clip you might see posted here.
H265 seems better for preserving fine details. Generally appears smoother than VP9, but sometimes appears more blocky.
I could not get a direct comparison between H265 placebo and VP9 good cpu-used 0 (placebo looks better with a 5.47% bitrate advantage), but H265 placebo is definitely better than VP9 good cpu-used 1.
Placebo was the same size as veryslow at the same CRF, but reduced compression artifacts slightly.
H265 medium seems like the best option in terms of size/quality/time tradeoff.
I've included a set of comparisons at frame 1000 of the clip, upscaled to 1080p. The VP9 frame timestamp is not identical to H265, but close enough. I've highlighted areas of note in red.
I've also compared video sizes at CRF 23:
H265
Placebo
Veryslow +0%
Slow +4.029%
Medium +2.877%
Faster +47.194%
Ultrafast +27.914%
VP9
good -cpu-used 0 +38.905% (vs. placebo)
good -cpu-used 1 +47.839% (vs. placebo)
There might be the possibility that VP9 CRF 23 does not correspond to H265 CRF 23, but these results are comparable to a professional study I read which found on average H265 required 49.4% less bitrate to match VP9 on subjective quality ('Comparison of compression efficiency between HEVC/H.265
and VP9 based on subjective assessments').
As the bitrate decreases however, this difference seems to narrow.
Time to encode:
Placebo 53:50
Slow 8:08
Medium 2:15
good -cpu-used 0 18:55 (note: bitrate ended up 5.47% lower)
good -cpu-used 1 3:05
Sources and encoding settings used:
MUM-165 1280x720 29.971fps 2314kbps (+160kbps audio), 00:43:00 to 00:44:00
h265 400kbps variable 2 pass HE-AAC 48kbps stereo web optimized
vp9 -threads 4 -slices 4 -quality good -cpu-used X -lag-in-frames 16 -auto-alt-ref 1 -ac 2 -c:a libopus -b:a 48k -qmin 2 -crf 22 -qmax 42
Note: Audio file only included for effect on encoding, not included in video file sizes mentioned above. VP9 good cpu-used-1 turned out almost exactly the same filesize as the H265 clips.
To get the file size comparisons at CRF 23, I used 00:43:00 to 00:43:10.
CPU: Intel i5 4670
In summary, use H265 medium for clips under 2-3 minutes in length, particularly if there are close-ups. VP9 good -cpu-used 1 may be better for longer clips or there is no focus or movement is more jerky. H265 veryslow for 1080p/4k clips under 20 seconds.
No.29521
No.29528
>>29521
looking through the boards list you can find a few voyeur/creep/hidden cam boards
the ones i've found are:
>>>/voyeur/
>>>/voy/
>>>/ipcam/
>>>/creepshot/
>>>/creep/
you can find a gem here and there in some of those boards
No.29963
>>11
Figured I'd start by posting a massive fucking whore.
No.30015
>>29963
Oh sweet, you posted ur mum?
No.30170
>>29963
Jez Lem why did she lick his shoe?
>>30015
BAZINBAWE
No.30283
>>30170
Because she's a whore and that's what whores do. She does kinkier stuff in the rest of the video but I have little time these days to convert more webms. Give me some time and I'll show you more.
No.30868
>>29963
wow they sound really angry that they have to have sex
No.31420
No.31467
>>29963
That's not good for your shoes.
No.31473
I know she goes by Veronica Sims and BlueEyedGemini and is a cam-whore. This MP4 is the only thing of her I've been able to find. I cant even find pictures of her.
No.31474
>>31473
shit. Sorry Posted in the wrong thread
No.32801
WHO IS SHE?! PLEASE, HELP ME!
No.32803
>>32801
Anikka Albrite - Banging Beauties
No.32804
>>32803
Or not, I am wrong, sorry.
No.33459
anybody know what's wrong with webms since last night's crash?
none of mine are getting posted, but there's lots of other ones working fine
No.33827
No.33829
No.33834
>>33829
first one sorry i completely ignored the other one
No.33837
>>33834
That's Nicole from ifriends. She went by the name "justme834u"
She's a webcam girl.
No.33886
>>33867
I don't quite agree with the music choice, but very much with the video.
I would like it if you produce more of this.
No.33912
>>33894
Yeeeeeessssss!!!!!
More like this video please!!x
No.33931
>>33894
pretty sure this is CP
No.33949
>>33931
>>33912
can you describe what was the video about?
No.33981
No.34374
No.34515
>>33889
>>33924
Where in the world are these 2 videos from. I think I gotta have them
No.34568
>>34535
wtf who is that grill
No.34639
>>34568
Wish I knew, man. If someone sauces, I'd be happy to find the vid and make more webms.
No.34679
No.34681
Someone sourced this last night, but it was too a dead youtube account. Someone has to have something, I would literally pay her money to fart on a tissue, and mail it to me so i could sniff it.
No.34682
>>34681
named miranda stocks or something like that, play around on google
i think that webm comes from this vid https://vimeo.com/114853841
No.34754
Someone please make a webm of:
www.pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=1239445759
This video will NOT load for me and I can't download it for some reason. She's my favorite camgirl and she only has a few videos out there and I just found this one and I can't watch it. It gets to 54 seconds before it just stops in its tracks. Please help an anon out.
No.34781
>>34754
It's 9 minutes long and has no audio, but I got you mate. Give me a few minutes.
I may split it if the quality ends up shitty.
No.34785
>>29391
I'm going to stick with VP9 because I can't condone that fucking patent shit, even if it doesn't directly affect me.
Non-free software patents are a fucking sin.
No.34787
>>34754
>>34781
Here you go, friend.
Yes, that artifacting and shit quality is in the original video. Sorry, guess her webcam sucks. I would have split it up if the quality would have improved at all.
No.34813
Hey mr/mrs Board Owner a few boards you might want to add to https://8ch.net/wx/boards.html :
>>>/femdom/ (femdom, obviously)
>>>/in/ (incest)
>>>/pussyenvy/ (ballbusting/pussyenvy, femdom sub-board basically)
k thnx bai
No.34815
>>34787
You're the best, seriously, thank you.
Have some OC.
No.34826
No.35089
>>35002
nigger for what reason?
no curves, ugly face, it might as well be a trap for all the assets this bitch has.
No.35249
>>34997
so fucking skinny, i thought it was a gay guy at first dressed like a girl.
No.35323
>>33889
>>33924
Can anyone give me a name or something on these 2?
No.35457
No.35515
>>35488
Holy shit, that butt is 10/10.
No.35704
No.35714
No.35739
No.37289
>>34638
Teens Like It Big - Dakota Skye - Don't Fuck My Brother, Bitch
No.37356
>>37290
Public Agent Katka
No.37410
>>37375
Delicious amateur buttfuck. Fuck yes.
No.37487
Any wise ones got tips for highest-quality webms? I'm talking above vlc and 'tard.
I found Miro converter, which knocks out some high quality shit, but it makes for a two-step process.
This is from 'tard:
No.37488
And this is from Miro. There's got to be a way to get this kind of result in one step.
No.37490
My internet connection is so slow that I get this 3/4 of the times:
The server took too long to submit your post. Your post was probably still submitted. If it wasn't, 8chan might be experiencing issues right now – please try your post again later.
No.37495
>>37494
10 minutes to post a single webm.
No.37683
>>37496
Isn't that from toypics? Did she remove those videos because I can't seem to find them there anymore…
No.37932
>>37915
>Again please take this to the meta thread. If anyone bothered asking I'm trying to figure out some compromise to make everyone happy.
Make the rules similar to 4chan /gif/
>/gif/ is dedicated to NSFW gifs &webm files. Please review the following rules to ensure your posts contribute to the overall board.
>1. Do not request. All requests belong in >>>/r/
>2. Contribute 2 or more additional related images when starting a thread (in addition to the OP).
>3. Report rule-breaking posts and threads. Use the inline extension for easier access to this feature (Settings>Recommended>Report Button>Save)
>4. If you know the source of a given image, please provide it directly. Do not respond to sauce beggars.
>The Global Rules apply as well. Provide good content and report infringing posts.
NO MORE FUCKING SETS AND RANDOM PORN PICTURES
NO MORE YOUNOW THREADS. THEY BELONG ON /hebe/
>Webms take effort to make and the board was getting slower and slower despite efforts to encourage webm creation.
This is nobody's fault but yours. This board is so fucking bland looking.
The owner should put and example of what he wants to see on his board.
No.38173
>>37932
>NO MORE FUCKING SETS AND RANDOM PORN PICTURES
So by removing all image threads there will be a tidal wave of new webm threads on the board. There is no logic in your "solution". In fact it's narrow minded and only reduces traffic even more.
>This is nobody's fault but yours. This board is so fucking bland looking.
Are you serious?? This board looks like every board in the top 5. You are a stupid person and the dregs that conceived you are bad at parenting.
There are aprox. 175 threads on this board. Probably 25 or less are not specific webm/gif threads. I really don't see your point, no, no point at all.
No.38329
>>38173
This entire board went from an extremely active and engaging community full of people posting OC, to a ded board with nothing but shitty pics and year old webms. There's a damn good reason why nobody goes to this board any more, why Lem is always desperately shilling on other boards, and why fucking /b/ of all places is making more OC porn webms than the dedicated porn board.
Lem's half baked decision to make this board one big porn board has been all for the worse, and he's too fucking dense to realize this.
No.38344
>>38173
>So by removing all image threads there will be a tidal wave of new webm threads on the board.
i think the decision to make this a general porn board drove away a lot of the original webm makers. like, i make a ton of webms and i know i'm definitely discouraged from posting shit here by the shittiness that goes on everywhere on this board. right now there are at least five bad picture threads on the first page. WE'VE BECOME WORSE AT HAVING ACTUAL NEW CONTENT THAN 4CHAN /GIF/ for god's sake. this board used to be great at posting oc and now there's ONE THREAD where OC is being posted on the whole board
and this is a separate meta complaint, but the amount of, like, dumbass political bullshit that gets spouted on this board is dumb as fuck. why can't you, for example, ignore a thread with webms of black women instead of dropping in and saying some shit like "hurr monkeys". this board used to be great at posting oc and now there's ONE THREAD where OC is being posted on the whole board
No.38345
>>38344
unsuccessful revision of my post.. just driving my point home i guess
No.38511
>>38329
> and why fucking /b/ of all places is making more OC porn webms than the dedicated porn board.
Again this makes no sense. "image threads of nudity are what's fucked up all the webm development". Coming from your observations on /b/, where 90% of the threads are rate my dick, YLYL, or Walk in see this WAT DO! You do understand how retarded your analogy sounds now. Well I hope you do.
Yea I really get your weak point. Also, the board didn't go from >an extremely active and engaging community full of people posting OC, to a ded board with nothing but shitty pics and year old webms.
It had year old webms before the change.
>>38344
> i'm definitely discouraged from posting shit here by the shittiness that goes on everywhere on this board.
OR, I am a weak human and feel unable to compete with others. I have no drive to be the change I talk about. Others should change first so I can be a follower. All I have ever done is follow. I will forever be a Beta. I can't post my huge archive of oc because other people are stupid.
Is that accurate anon. Is It. Thats what I am hearing. Is that what your trying to relay. Of course it is.
No.38514
>>38511
no, you fucking retard, the point is that idiots like you literally aren't worth posting oc for
No.38515
>>38514
i don't want to be a leader of fucking idiots and racists
No.38516
>>38511
>>38515
also, i actually DO post OC here (only because it's literally the only place to do so at the moment), so fuck off with your weakass bullshit lol
you didn't address my point at all. this board used to have year old webms but it also had a lot more QUALITY CONTENT and a bunch of people creating webms. nobody posts new shit now, they sit around, shitpost and demand sources
No.38517
Gonna chime in to agree that the pics are a problem. I've posted a ton of OC over the last couple months, partly because I still think this is a place worth saving.
But the thread of blondes I posted a few days ago feels like it'll be the end. We just can't have thread after thread of nothing but pics, with any new content greeted with the same few assholes rushing to scream their racism or argue over pronouns or just generally crap everywhere.
It's one thing when that gets lost in the crowd to a certain extent because the threads are busy. But when three quarters of what gets posted is bullshit, 23% is pics, and 2% is actual new webms, that's reason to find somewhere else to post.
No.38523
>>38511
Whoever this faggot is(Lem), he's getting awfully triggered awfully easily.
No.38770
>>37932
>Make the rules similar to 4chan /gif/
>4chan
No.
>This board is so fucking bland looking.
Been looking into CSS a bit so there might be something in the future there. You know I've asked for help with this from the board community before but people are too lazy to even submit banners.
>>38173
>and only reduces traffic even more
You can't see but I'm touching my finger to my nose.
>>38329
>why Lem is always desperately shilling on other boards
I started posting obvious advertising exclusively on >>>/b/ back around October last year. In fact I used to encourage people to advertise >>>/wx/ everywhere and people still do. How new are you? I don't even do it much anymore in comparison to early days. It's how I initially got the word out about the board.
>>38344
>right now there are at least five bad picture threads on the first page
Look I understand you guys don't like pictures but removing them means the death of the board. It was dying before I made the change. So help me come up with a compromise or come up with and alternative to increase board activity and population.
>dumbass political bullshit that gets spouted on this board is dumb as fuck
Yup. Problem is free speech so I can't really do much about it. Where do I draw the line? What get's deleted and what doesn't when it's a discussion related to porn?
>ONE THREAD where OC is being posted on the whole board
That is really easy to undo. However posting OC isn't restricted to this thread. Posting here is meant to allow people to help each other make better OC and more of it. Helping people with automation for example.
>>38511
>It had year old webms before the change
Yeah. I really don't understand how people believe that the board was ever really active. The oldest complaint I've repeatedly gotten has been that the board is too slow. That only stopped when pictures were allowed.
>>38517
>We just can't have thread after thread of nothing but pics
You could post webms into pic threads. Not even trying to be a dick. That would elevate the quality of some of those thread.
One final thing. Anyone who has been making OC and paying attention to what I've said on this in the past knows that part of the motivation behind allowing pics was to bring new pornographers to the board so your stuff is seen more. I wanted more people to see your work. The end hope was that some would stick around to make webms of their own.
P.S. Sorry for the late post but I've had very little time for a proper reply.
No.38782
>>38770
You're even more retarded then you let on.
No.38793
>>38770
Not one of the guys howling at you, I'm the last guy you tagged in your latest post.
Speaking just for myself, the stormfags are too much. They're just too high-density, man. Even 4chan knows to scorch that shit in porn threads. I don't even post IR very often and I'm fucking sick of those assholes, the guys who go to those threads a lot must be tapped out.
The 8mb webms are a big plus. I've posted a ton of OC here and I'd be happy to take pics of the (You)s to prove it. I hope to keep posting here. But it can't be ten replies of "that's not my specific fetish so you're a faggot!" to straight porn or "omg it's a black girl and I'm a stormfag I'm triiiiigerred waaaaah!" or the same tired, hundred-post argument about pronouns for trans girls or just whiny bullshit.
Not trying to tell you how to run your shit. I wish you well either way. Just contributing my 2 cents on what'll keep me putting OC here.
No.38806
>>38770
I appreciate your thorough response, and having seen your posting in the past re: these things, it's clear you have only good intentions for this board.
>Look I understand you guys don't like pictures but removing them means the death of the board. So help me come up with a compromise
spitballing, but the thing that annoys me most about the switch is the amount of mixed content threads that it created. could we maybe separate things, like, "x image thread" and "x video thread"? something like that. i don't think there's enough activity on the board that this'll have negative effects like pushing relatively new threads off the front page, but it would streamline things a bit and fluff up activity in a bunch of different threads at once
>>38793
Everything this dude said is completely on point. Especially re: the casual racism, which to be fair seems sadly endemic to "chan culture". Optimally, I'd like to be able to report politically charged bullshit that's in no way relevant to the thread and have it deleted. I understand if this couldn't be a hard rule or anything, but I don't think this board is fast enough that the amount of reports would be too much to go over on a case-by-case basis for stuff like this.
Another problem is the amount of threads that look like request threads, where the op doesn't have anything to share and is just asking for shit. There are a bunch of these on the board right now.. as a suggestion, just a general rule along the lines of 4chan gif's "you have to have x pieces of content to post" would be great.
No.38807
>>38806
>could we maybe separate things, like, "x image thread" and "x video thread"?
to clarify, this could mean something along the lines of all OPs specifying whether their threads are for videos, for pictures, or mixed content. and to be fair, I do know this would be a hard thing to enforce, but i'm sure we could come up with a workable fix
No.39123
I just love the teen's voice.
No.39124
i just love the teen's voice
No.39277
Sorry guys I don't have time to properly reply to you all for another while.
Current circumstances will likely require I take on a few helper mods to handle deleting CP and such (really fucking busy these days) so if you've been posting a ton of good stuff to >>>/wx/ I might just ask you specifically. Mail me a "resume" and be a little patient. If you don't know my e-mail or can't find it you maybe shouldn't be a mod. If you're from >>>/tech/ please do apply.
One thing I can say though is that if anyone knows if it is possible to visually differentiate pic posts from webm posts using CSS (by highlighting webm post or resizing them for example) please tell me how. It's the solution I'm hoping for. I think that would probably make most of you happy.
No.39518
>>39277
I use this line of JS to hide posts containing jpegs and it works fine. Not sure if it's possible in pure CSS tho
$(".post").has("a[href$='.jpg']").hide()
No.40105
>>39277
About this whole mod thing… when? I understand that you've got stuff to sort out about pics and that's cool, but in the meantime can we get someone doing janitorial duties?
No.40532
>>40105
Just sent an e-mail to a prospective new mod. Still hoping for a few more resumes.
No.40802
No.41454
>>38770
sorry to say but the board has been ruined by racist retards. your assertion that you have to leave them otherwise the board would die hasn't worked out well, because the board is dead anyway. few people like posting oc content for dumbasses. free speech is not spamming racist shit and child porn. this is your board, not a public space.
there was some good oc content, especially the creep and ir threads, but not anymore.
No.41494
>>41454
>sorry to say but the board has been ruined by racist retards
Sick opinion bro, but free speech still says they can say whatever they want. "Racism" is subjective.
If you don't like it, just hide the posts. I wasn't even aware there was political stuff going on because I MOSTLY JUST LOOK AT PORN.
No.41637
>>38806
>Everything this dude said is completely on point. Especially re: the casual racism, which to be fair seems sadly endemic to "chan culture".
Jesus christ, just go back to tumblr already.
No.41801
>>29391
No sauce on that ?
No.41808
>>41773
It's in the fucking file name you tard.
No.41814
File: 1447962168278.png (90.79 KB, 173x217, 173:217, d2a52d76e1d82d6becebae2673….png)
can we slow down the cuck porn please?
No.41816
>>38770
>Look I understand you guys don't like pictures but removing them means the death of the board. It was dying before I made the change.
Make a separate porn/amateur pictures only board.
This board is for webms, mp4s and gifs only.
>So help me come up with a compromise or come up with and alternative to increase board activity and population.
Make this the general webm board in 8chan not just porn webms that way people can make more content and post more OC.
NO MORE PORN PICTURES OR SETS HERE
No.41859
>>39277
> using CSS
Sorry, you're out of luck. There's no way yet in CSS to select an element based on the child-elements it has.
> The Selectors Level 4 Working Draft includes a :has() pseudo-class… As of 2015, this is not available in any browser.
> li:has(> a.active) { /* styles to apply to the li tag */ }
No.41880
please tell me name of this movie or at least pornstar thanks…
No.41905
>>41816
The problem with making webms is finding content good enough to actually make a webm of.
Personally i think high quality pictures can capture moments that webm's cant, but seeing how many people dislike pictures i'll stop posting them and instead convert webms from now on.
No.41936
I've got a Mega of all of it, the vids and stuff, if anyone wants it?
No.41943
>>41905
>Personally i think high quality pictures can capture moments that webm's cant
You fucking kidding?
You fap to pictures?
No.42034
No.42221
>>41859
Well fuck. I'll try to figure something else out. Maybe people could suggest this feature for infinity next. Actually I highly recommend you do this.
No.42441
>>33867
PLease kill yourself
No.42442
No.42672
>>42221
Dude, come on. The child porn. Appoint a fucking janitor if you can't be here.
No.42682
>>42672
another jan/mod actually was appointed (me, hello) but while I have been removing a lot of spam, it just keeps coming. we're constantly banning this person and they're constantly getting around it. they're posting multiple threads at a time now out of spite or something as well..
I delete these posts when I see them, and i come here a few times a day just to check. Problem is when they get posted irregularly all day like they have been there can be a good little while where these things are able to stay up for a bit just because of how they fell between our checks.
so hopefully you understand. we absolutely don't want these things on the board either. if you see it, please report it, but we can't do much more on our end than we already are. some suggestions
- if you know of or can suggest a way we can just be notified any new OPs are added to the board (thru any method) , I'd be happy to come in and make sure it's not anything against the rules or illegal each time, or
- if you have the time yourself, just apply yourself to help jan the board.. this really seems like the most direct way to combat this
No.42698
>>42682
I actually did email him offering to help. Didn't want to be a hypocritical asshole. Apparently "I have no mod experience, but I'm willing to delete shitposts" wasn't persuasive. Who knew?
No.43166
File: 1449321996520.png (Spoiler Image, 13.55 KB, 212x389, 212:389, skeleton_dancing[1].png)
>>35488
fucking spoiler that shit, anon.
No.43170
>>42682
Pretty much this. I also sent an e-mail about this to hotwheels a while back when this shit started and never got a reply. The wordfilters help a little I suppose but I highly recommend people start also using global report for the CP spam.
We keep deleting them. No one clicks the shit. They keep coming anyways. It's truly bizarre.
>>42698
>Apparently "I have no mod experience, but I'm willing to delete shitposts" wasn't persuasive. Who knew?
Yeah sorry but that should have been obvious. You can try again though.
No.44034
>>41801
Haven't been here in a while so the response is late, but source is MUM-165, and it's damn good from memory.
Pictures should be removed from this board already. I wouldn't have minded if they were actually good, high resolution pictures like pic related, but instead it's mostly just pics like these shitting up the place:
https://8ch.net/wx/src/1449366222329.jpg
Friendly reminder to to update to libvpx 1.5.0. Encoding fps has tripled, and you get ~5-15 fps with good -cpu-used-1 for VP9. You can just drag and drop the latest ffpmeg 64-bit binary into the corresponding folder with WebM for Retards.
No.44369
No.44407
>>43170
lol, someone spammed 5 images at once…
No.44942
Would anyone know how I would convert stuff to webm while retaining the same quality? It seems like I have to keep converting to webm via trial and error to get the right bitrate.
No.44998
>>44942
Use Webm for retards if you aren't already
Download the latest ffmpeg 64-bit static binary from here: http://ffmpeg.zeranoe.com/builds/
Drag and drop into the Webm for Retards 'Win64' folder, replacing the old ffmpeg binary.
When using Webm for Retards, manually change '-quality best' to '-quality good' and add '-cpu-used 0' or 'cpu-used 1' (second is significantly faster with little quality/size difference).
Also use -b:a 48k to set Opus audio bitrate. 48k is good enough for most clips, while 32k is still decent quality. 72k-80k isn't far from transparent (equivalent to ~128kbps-160kbps MP3).
Use 'variable' encoding mode. Getting the right bitrate using the quantisizers takes some trial and error. Run it for a few seconds to see if it's on track.
Here is how you calculate the best bang-for-buck quality (subjective testing gives 4 out of 5 on average):
Height x Width x Frame Rate x 0.05 = bits per second (for video only)
So for example:
1280 x 720 x 29.97 x 0.05 = 1381017.6
1381017.6 bits divided by 1024 = 1348.65 kbit/s
But generally you can get away with 0.025 instead of 0.05, which has a subjective rating of 2.5/5, which would be 675 kbit/s for a 720p porn clip. That's for VP9 btw, double the figure for VP8.
Because the file limit is 8MB (8192kb), here are the maximum clip durations you can get with bearable quality and 32kbit/s audio and 1% overhead:
1080p = 41 seconds
720p = 1 min 31 sec
540p = 2 min 37 sec
450p = 3 min 39 sec
If you don't want go through the hassle of finetuning a clip, I recommend you aim to undershoot the limit by 1 or 2 megabytes.
No.44999
>>44942
I also have an untested theory that constraining the quantisizers (i.e. min 18 max 26, instead of say min 10 max 40) will result in better results with porn.
Because what variable bitrate does is it favors movement scenes by assigning more bits to them, whereas in porn what we mainly want is to see fine details in still scenes. Detail during rapid movements I think is less important than when say watching a film.
No.45028
>>44998
I don't use windows, but I'll certainly analyze this program to see what it does. Thanks.
No.45127
Every time I try to post something in this board it breaks. Fucking ridiculous.
No.45136
>>45135
Oh fuck me, I selected the wrong one and of course this site doesn't have delete post
No.45255
>>45136
fuck you for not giving source anyways
No.45715
>>42442
anon-ib australia, perth thread. That's where I got it. Not op tho
No.46245
requesting a webm of link provided:
http://xhamster.com/movies/5464897/horny_silly_selfie_teens_video_48.html
I can't do it myself for maybe a week or two.
No.46246
No.46317
>>46256
Happy new year everyone!
No.49758
>>46245
>>46246
Simple trick:
View the source code of the page, Ctrlf+F4 and search "mp4", copy the link, open VLC, clic on "Media" and then "Convert/Save", go to "Network", paste the link.
You can directly convert it in webm.
No.49759
No.49884
>>45137
>filename isn't actually the source
I hope you die.
No.49984
File: 1454525496322.png (424.38 KB, 1964x1852, 491:463, XMedia Recode - WebM Tutor….png)
I made a little tutorial for making webms with XMedia Recode. It's probably not perfect and looks pretty bad, but maybe it helps someone.
No.50095
What are the rules on having a torrents thread here? It doesn't seem to be against either global or board rules, but I'm asking anyway.
No.50152
There are starting to be a lot of new threads with zero replies. Judging by the way they look, I'd assume they're made by the same person. If the person who made them doesn't offer more than the opening post, then they probably should just be deleted. Otherwise if it continues, they'll eventually push off threads that actually do get posts.
Maybe add a rule that new threads need at least 5-10 pictures/webms from the OP or something.
No.50335
>>49984
Very nice. Lets hope it gets more people to make some good OC.
>>50152
Yeah I don't know how anyone can think that's not just straight shitposting. I amended Rule 4. Should be enough for now.
No.50369
>>49984
Here's a handy video tutorial somebody made also for the same software.
No.52777
What happened to all the IR threads?
Did the salt reach peak levels that the admin decided to kill it all?
No.54483
does anyone understand why in a lot of threads there seems to be one guy just shitposting?
Not even people saying "sauce", but shit like this.
No.54529
>>54483
Yeah, I noticed too. They're like the comments on any public porn site.
Kinda robotic, no context
Maybe it's what pornography does to people?
Can the BO or a mod shed some light on this?
No.54573
>>54529
>>54483
It's a mystery to me as well. The IDs are all different so it's different people or someone with a vpn etc. Maybe it's random people passing through not knowing shit about imageboards, posting once never to return again.
Really my guess is as good as your guys. I simply have no clue,
No.54574
>>54573
>broken webm I made
>no idea what the source was
Fuck……
No.54587