720p encode 700mb and 720p encode 1.5gb or over 3gb

[ali2k1]

Hi can someone please tell me the difference in these encodes. Are they the same in quality. are they hd, reason I'm saying this is because I spent a whole day downloading a movie 720p which was 2.5gb and that evening I find the same movie in 720p at 700mb and I can't tell the difference.
Both in in h264 aac audio.
I am new to videos and please excuse my ignorance and if I posted in the wrong section.

Thank you

[guns1inger]

If you really can't tell the difference then one of the following is happening

1. The running time is relatively short - less than 30 minutes - and the larger file is using far more bitrate than is necessary
2. The larger file has been really badly encoded and looks as crappy as a heavily compressed 700 mb file
3. You are watching these on an iPod nano, and on a screen that small you simply can't see the difference
4. Your seeing eye dog is lying to you about how good the 2.5GB file really looks

Just for shits and giggles, post a mediainfo tree view of both files so we can see what you are looking at

[jman98]

In addition to guns1inger's thoughts, if it's animation, note that animation looks better at lower bit rates than live action. Live action at the same low bit rate would look very bad. If you were looking at, say, The Simpsons, yes, I could believe that you really can't tell much of a difference between the 2 versions.

[manono]

My thought is that the 700 MB one isn't 720p, but maybe sourced from 720p and then down-rezzed to 624x352 or some such. But, as guns1inger says, we'll need the MediaInfo info.

[ali2k1]

hey guys sorry for the late response as i had no idea how to get mediainfo but i managed with my expertise!!!lol

so here goes beforehand i dont know much and i did watch this on 50inch plasma.

please find attatchment. reason im interested i like to watch hd but downloading and bandwith restricts me.

[jman98]

Wow, that bit rate in the prince600mb.txt file is what I would call "aggressive". 715 Kbps bit rate for 1280x536. The bit rate in the other file is over 2000 Kpbs, which is still fairly low but a bit more realistic.

I would like to make a guess. The good HDTVs, such as (but not limited to) Samsung, have very good filters in them that can remove a lot of block noise. I have a 42 inch LCD HDTV and even VCD looks pretty good on it. But if you watch the same VCD on a PC it won't look as good. Maybe your TV is simply doing an excellent job of making the smaller file look better by making the defects less noticeable. You could try watching the file on your PC and see if it looks inferior to how it looks on your TV. But if I'm right, strictly speaking the files are NOT equivalent quality, your TV is just doing a great job of fooling you into thinking so, which is what you want it to do. Watch both on the same PC and I think you will agree that the one listed in princ2.5.txt is better.

[ali2k1]

Thanks for your answer, I am literally laughing regarding your comment on the 600mb. I was confused because they uploaded the file as 720p and it took me 10 minutes to download but I'm gonna stick to the larger files as the audio is much better. Thank you for clearing it up they are not hd but probably sd.

Thanks again

[jman98]

BOTH files are HD. The smaller one simply uses a very low bit rate. There are some other differences in how they were encoded from an audio and video point of view, but the bit rate is a big difference. The resolution in both files is the same and 1280x536 is a high def resolution.