Hello - I need some help understanding something. I’m looking at two WEB-DL files from reputable groups that are identical in nearly all ways (see info below), except one file is noticeably larger than the other (2.8GB vs 3.47GB, for example). I thought WEB-DL’s should be the same size if they’re from the same source (AMZN in this instance), so I’m a little confused as to why there’s such a disparity in size when all else appears equal.

Any idea’s what could explain the difference in file size here? I’m assuming the FLUX file is older based on when it was first uploaded vs the NTb one. Could this have something to do with it?

Bonus question: Which file would you choose in this situation?

(1) 1080p.AMZN.WEB-DL.DDP2.0.H.264-NTb

  • FileSize…: 2.80 GiB
  • Duration…: 42 min 35 s
  • Video…: High@L4 | 1920x1080 @ 9 197 kb/s
  • Audio…: English Dolby Digital Plus | 2 CH @ 224 kb/s
  • Subtitle…: English / English.

(2) 1080p.AMZN.WEB-DL.DDP.2.0.H.264-FLUX

  • FileSize…: 3.47 GiB
  • Duration…: 42 min 12 s
  • Video…: High@L4 | 1920x1080 @ 11.3 Mb/s
  • Audio…: English Dolby Digital Plus | 2 CH @ 224 kb/s
  • Subtitle…: English.
  • godless@latte.isnot.coffeeEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    The source defines the bitrate at which it is streaming, which sets the theoretical maximum. The release group then decides if and how much they want to compress the file.

    Theoretical maximum because the release group could go above spec, but that wouldn’t add any benefits.

    • mammut@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      Unless the meaning of the term has changed, WEB-DL are not re-encoded by the group. WEB-DL is meant to indicate a “lossless” copy of the stream. (Obviously not literally lossless, since no video streaming service is streaming lossless, but lossless relative to the original stream).