Fur An Imaginary Portrait Of Diane Arbus 2006 XviD AC3-WAF

***************************************************************************************** Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus (2006) ***************************************************************************************** [RELEASE INFORMATION] SOURCE ******* : DVD (RC3) RIPPER ******* : Team_WAF REL DATE ***** : 2008.05.04 VIDEO INFO *** : XviD 1.1.3 @ 1,949 Kbps Avg AUDIO INFO *** : AC3 5.1 CH @ 448 Kbps FRAME RATE *** : 23.976 fps RESOLUTION *** : 800 x 336 (2.38 : 1) RUNTIME ****** : 2:02:05 LANGUAGE ***** : English SUBTITLE ***** : Korean, English REL FILES **** : Fur.An.Imaginary.Portrait.Of.Diane.Arbus.2006.XviD.AC3-WAF.avi (2.05GB) ***************************************************************************************** [MOVIE INFORMATION] http://movie.naver.com/movie/bi/mi/basic.nhn?code=45655 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0422295/ ***************************************************************************************** [RELEASE NOTE] N/A *****************************************************************************************

udp://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80
udp://open.demonii.com:1337
udp://tracker.coppersurfer.tk:6969
udp://exodus.desync.com:6969

rippervanwinkle (2011-01-19)

It's the usual WAF rip - massively oversharpened and denoised and deblocked to the point that people look a little like figures from a video game, all shapes and edge sharpness and no texture.....but it's better than nothing. In fact even with the kind of oversharpening that makes your eyes bleed still looks better than most people's awful soft, grainy xvid rubbish. But someone needs to tell these WAF guys about h264, or maybe grab them by the shoulders and steer them towards a good optician....
Anyway thanks to the uploader and anyone who wants to see this art house film without it being obliterated by a crazed ripper's filter chain (never mind the quality, feel the width!) you can find the DVD so cheap on amazon that I'm suprpised they don't just mail it out for free.

rberger (2013-02-24)

Got to agree with rippervanwinkle I'm afraid. Image quality is sub par in the manner he describes.
Too bad that rippers always seem to be trying to "improve" the image, by applying filters of various kinds. Where the best thing to do is usually to just leave the image alone. This certainly applies to retail sources of standard film material (no particular grain etc).
So the only explanation I'm having for why rippers do this is probably because they want us to keep looking for something better. And I will certainly do, in this case.