When your porn collection goes from 1TB to 330GB thanks to h.265

>when your porn collection goes from 1TB to 330GB thanks to h.265

Other urls found in this thread:

ffmpeg.org/
trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/Encode/H.265
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

It's a pretty good codec indeed...

Well that interesting

What tool did you use to do so?

ffmpeg.org/ most likely what else

How does that exactly work. Do you just use the codec and replace the original. Or you cut the nitrate down and use the new codec

Okay, I'll be checking this out. I have to cut down my anime collection size because its eating 1/3 of my external HDD space.

Me too needs shrink my porn
I tried handbrake and 720p fastest profile

it shrink it by 50% but quality is not good and 700mb movie took me 4 minutes on 100% cpu load

it was actually 480p30fps fastest

I tried handbrake again with H.265 MVK 480p30 preset and 700mb movie takes 40 minutes to convert on my old quad core

thats ridiculous because I have hundreds of movies

with different very fast preset it took 4 minutes and quality was shitty but at least file size was good

>took me 4 minutes on 100% cpu load
>CPU
You're supposed to encode on GPU you fucking retard

You can't encode with a intel iGPU can you?

how to do that?

I already set scaler to Bicubic (OpenCL)
and they said that it only adds up to 5% performance increase

literally the only thing worth ripping to 265 is porn

google quicksync

is there a tool that can recursively go through a directoy and do this? Preferably one that will delete the source after ripping?

av1 when?
uhh if you want fucking horrible quality, yea

HW encoding yields horrible quality or huge file sizes you dipshits.

because using GPU is such fucking bad quality they don't do it.

he's fucking retarded

the only "ok" gpu to encode on is intel iGPU which uses quicksync

Dont have a sperg out, wally.

I was just answering the guys question, he never asked if it was good.

I need professional preset for handbrake with best quality / time spent encoding ratio for porn movies

please share

For anybody who cares: it's unfinished but still useful

>newbie encoding guide v1.0 [04-06-2017]

>Video codec
Use HEVC, hardware decoders for it are plentiful.

>Quality
Use CRF unless you desperately need to fit your video in a specific streaming bandwidth (VBR) or fit inside a specific medium such as a 1GB file size or dvd (VBR 2 pass). 22 CRF means a good quality compared to original and 16 CRF means high quality compared to original. Using any other CRF beside 0 for lossless encodes should be avoided.

>Preset
The "fast" preset should almost always be used as it gives you the best balance between video compression efficiency and encoding speed. Anything faster will give you bigger file sizes and anything slower will give you slower encoding speeds.

>Encoder
Staxrip should be used for most things unless you really need to fine tune your shit, in which case MEgui will suffice

>10-bit or 8-bit
Generally 10-bit will help out with color banding and improve compression efficiency but at the cost of little hardware decoding support. So only use 8-bit if general hardware decoding compatibility is important to you.

Certified YIFI quality

I only get off to booru pictures

Oh are that retard that keeps telling everyone to encode in 12-bit HEVC and use an average bitrate of 30 Mbps on all sources?

Must be nice having a super computer at home and thousands of HDDs.

must be nice to have 1080p videos look like 4 different shades of brown trying to throw up

>HW encoding yields horrible quality
Why does this happen? Honest question, CPUs are hardware too. What makes them inherently superior to GPUs? I thought video encoding was something you could do in parallel but I don't know shit.

>saving porn

RTFM

trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/Encode/H.265

I bet you masturbate to 3DPD

>he thinks H265 is a magic bullet against shitty presets

laughingwhores.jpeg

idk senpai, the h.265 audio is kinda too crisp for my taste.

>I thought video encoding was something you could do in parallel
you're right!
the problem is, the more you do in parallel, the less efficient the compression is going to be
so ideally, you want to do as much as you can in serial
and yes, that means even encoding on multi-core cpus is a hit on efficiency, it's a tradeoff, video encoding is all about tradeoff's. most people are cool with encoding 4x faster with a couple percent less efficiency, but the gpu is whole other story, and should only really be used for encoding when speed is /much/ more important than compression efficiency (mostly ephemerial things like intermediate encodes and live streams)

that's from micro mirroring in the floor, the sound waves are being transferred back to your cables causing positive feedback and glare in the top end, sometimes codecs can change this because of the data moving to the speakers is different.

get cable elevators, preferably adjustable

Oh, I see. Thank you for your answer, kind user.

>h.265
>audio
What?

The presets are good enough for the average joe, no need to fuck with them, osama bin laden.

Besides it's the switch from 8-bit to 10-bit HEVC that gives you the most visual improvement anyway.

Yes, it's called a shell.

You know what the average joe loved?
YIFI Torrents

Certified YIFI
>hurr muh 10bit
>hurr my H265/x265
>muh actual setting dont matter because hurr durr

lmao, you might as well use quicksync or CUDA/AMDs whatever now youre at it

>having a collection
>having local storage at all

It's 2017 desu, what are you doing with your life?

>You know what the average joe loved?
>YIFI Torrents
>Certified YIFI
hmmm, tru

>letting others store your data
cuck

It's because of rotational velocidensity idiot, it affects movies the same way as audio.

x265 is pretty amazing if you're cool with some smoothing and just want a smaller file

i've found it's not really worth the time over x264 for really high quality encodes, but for the "lower end" ones, it does a great job avoiding really noticable artifacts

pic related, 43 minutes and only 363MiB

Have you compared the latest X265 and X264 encoders at the same CRF values?

not for a little while, but i have tested both quite a bit
"same CRF values" doesn't really mean much, since the same on both doesn't give (close to) the same result

and by "it's not really worth the time over x264 for really high quality encodes"
i mean i found that x265 /really/ likes to smooth things, even if you give it enough bits that an x264 encode with the same amount results in barely any artifacts (and with less smoothing)
i played around with the psycho-visual settings a bit, but only really got it closer to x264 when it was so different that it ended up not being any smaller than x264 anyway
i think the psycho-visual optimisations isn't up to par with x264 yet

Rumour is latest encoders now give you similar visual result at similar CRF.

I suggest you to compare the codecs again with the same CRF values.

>when you compress jpg with higher compression and your shit looks more like shit than before just to save a couple gigs
Wew good thing 50 dollars gets you a terabyte these days.

ps. it should be worth noting that this information isn't very general, since i did it to see how it will work for my own purposes, which also includes how fast it encodes
for x264, i can fairly comfortably encode stuff with the "veryslow" preset, with some adjustments, but with x265, it's much slower, so i use medium and slow (depending on input), also with some adjustments
so it's not a completely fair comparison, just a practical one on my part

i'll be sure to look into x264 again

Why don't you use a superior format like VP9?

Does re-encoding from a H264 to H265 make the video lose quality?

>the same feeling when opus

i () also tested VP9, but i couldn't even get it to compete well with x264 for my requirements
i really wanted to use it, too, since i like open formats

user, you just went full rotational velocidensity. Never go full rotational velocidensity.

Any kind of encode that involves using a lossy encoder will make you lose video quality. However depending on what CRF you set, you won't even notice it.

>reencoding 1TB of videos to h265
I feel so sorry for your CPU user

>"a tool"
>can't write a basic shell script to do this
Leave Sup Forums

>Use HEVC, hardware decoders for it are plentiful.
>hardware decoders for it are plentiful

if that were the case he would've complained about color smearing and a veiled image as well so i beg to differ

600 and 800 series snapovens, most modern x86 processors fully support 8-bit HEVC HW decoding.

In fact like half even support 10-bit HEVC HW decoding (ie kabylake, SD 820 and better).

At least with the x264 and x265 encoders using 1 thread vs 16 threads yields a bit for bit same output.
As far as why hw encoder's tend to be lower quality is they where made for speed like for live video chat.
x264 and x265 encoders where written in c and x86asm and by design they would need a rewrite to have any kind of gpu encoding, doing so would be very difficult to do in parallel, although they do an amazing job of taking advantage of x86 cores.

Also more specifically it's a lot to do with the hardware maker making an encoder / encoding api for their hardware.
Same with hardware decoding.