HEVC

is it still meme-tier or is it worth switching to yet?

Other urls found in this thread:

dvb.org/resources/public/scene/dvb-scene49.pdf
mpeg.chiariglione.org/sites/default/files/files/standards/parts/docs/w16698.zip
addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/h264ify/
my.mixtape.moe/eyoeoh.mkv
my.mixtape.moe/mlbchd.mp4
builds.x265.eu
bitmovin.com/bitmovin-supports-av1-encoding-vod-live-joins-alliance-open-media/
youtube.com/watch?v=lzPaldsmJbk
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

If you can run it smoothly then there's no reason not to convert your library - it should shrink your library quite a bit

Professional encoder here

No, it still is a meme. As of the version 2.3, there still isn't a native Film tuning and the default one delivers worse quality comparetively to x264 at profile 5.0+ and slower settings.

I've been making extensive texts every 2~3 versions.

I only recommend HEVC for flat digital animation (anime) and low grain with custom tune settings (default ones are shit) and very slow preset at CRF 17 or lower. Anything higher quality (CRF 16 or higher) x264 is still better.

>suggesting a lossy to lossy encoding
Don't be a retard, you will only make your videos look worse.

Though I did try encoding some low compleixty encode oversized porns I donwloaded some time ago and was disapointed with the results. As much as lossy to lossy transcode is undesirable, x265 just smooths away too much detail for significant (30%+) size savings.

Not a "professional" encoder, but I do experiment with it every year or so. So far, it yields much larger files than x264 at the same bitrate. Eh.

>So far, it yields much larger files than x264 at the same bitrate
>same bitrate
>much larger files

You should "professionally" kill yourself

dat oil painting effect tho

Good night, MPEG. You had a good run. We'll take it from here.

Its what i try to download all my anumu and TV shows in.

I stick to low-ish bitrate 720p(22 min TV shows are maybe 120megs each) or 480p(22 min TV shows are maybe 80megs each).

If it's good for anime, then that's all it needs.

You are retarded. It compresses files better while keeping the same quality as x264.

>It yields much larger files than x264 at the same bitrate.
>Not a "professional"

ya don't say

I have used it a few times, it's good but it still uses way too much CPU in most computers

Yes, is a problem, but with custom tuning, you can get some decent results.

At around 5000kbps for a 2.40 aspect ratio, mildly action 35mm hollywood flick, with default settings it is inferior than x264 even at very low speeds. However, after tuning it, it actually slightly surpass x264.

Though 5000kbps is not good enough for grain and detail retention at 1080p, I never go bellow 8000~10000kbps myself. At 8000kbps, no matter how much I tried tweak x265, I couldn't get it to look better than x264 with 5.1 profile and Film tune at very slow. Neverming x265 actually is 3 times slower.

Pic related. one of the test encodes at crf22. Smudged as fuck.

Here are the film tune settings I recommend for modern 35mm holywood films:

avs4x265.exe -o output.x265 --crf 18 --ctu 32 --max-tu-size 16 --tu-intra-depth 2 --tu-inter-depth 2 --rdpenalty 2 --me 4 --subme 5 --merange 44 --b-intra --no-amp --ref 6 --weightb --keyint 120 --min-keyint 1 --bframes 6 --aq-mode 1 --aq-strength 1.2 --rd 5 --psy-rd 1.2 --psy-rdoq 5.0 --rdoq-level 1 --no-sao --no-open-gop --rc-lookahead 80 --scenecut 100 --max-merge 4 --qcomp 0.6 --no-strong-intra-smoothing --deblock -2:-2 --qg-size 16 --ipratio 1.3 --input-depth 16 "input.avs"

Of course, tunings should always be adjusted according to source and CRF desired.

Hold out for AV1 as suggests.

HEVC is animu meme tier.

Not necessarily. Not good for old analog anime or non-flat highly detailed texturized and cgi anime either.

If you ever want to play your videos in a web browser, you don't want HEVC.

HEVC will force me to update all my computers just to see videos
>Please make it come later
>Please

That or AV1 will force goyim to buy a decent 4+ core CPU to decode 4k.

Recently I've been downloading only HEVC.
I used to download movies in the 3-5GB range now I can find get the same quality at much lower file sizes.
Not sure how it compares to 50GB x264 files though

>I used to download movies in the 3-5GB range now I can find get the same quality at much lower file sizes.

Because 99% of movie encoder "groups" (actually, kids) are shit that use lazy settings and profile 4.1

x264 profile 4.1 is up to 40% inferior to Profile x264 5.1. HEVC still can't beat x264 profile 5.1

It can store the same quality at half size compared to h264. But for GPU encoding you need at least GTX9xx and probably most TVs don't support it yet. So no meme if you have a good GPU

well definitely not now that AV1 will be out soon. If anything move to VP9 since licencing is a dead meme

...

>>suggesting a lossy to lossy encoding

ALL video online is lossy to lossy, there are no raw 1TB intermediate for a movie

Well, we also call BDRemuxes and transport streaming with no subtitles RAW, while that is not the correct term either. You got what I meant by that: recompressing an already overcompressed video in the first place.

>It can store the same quality at half size compared to h264.
That is a blatant lie. Stop propagating nonsense second hand jornalists and bloggers repeat without actually doing proper research about it.

It's a great and efficient codec...however not ready for prime time yet.

H264 is mature and everywhere.

H.265 is definitively worth using if you are encoding video from a good source. Video recorded with a cellphone, for example, become rather huge H.264 files who are not very well compressed for some reason (your phone may vary). Re-encoding these to H.265 will save you a lot of space without losing quality. If you're going to rip something like a BlueRay disc then it's also definitively worth using.

If you have a movie collection of BD-rips then it's probably not worth re-encoding but I guess that depends on how lossy the original rip is.

I re-encode all musicvideos and other videos that I put on my phone to H.265 because it saves a lot of space and all phones made the last 3 years have support for it. The PC on the other hand has been lagging, for example it's just the latest Intel CPUs that have hardware decoding for it and Ryzen doesn't have it. AMD GPUs do have it now but that's just starting with the latest cards (RX 4xx and later).

If you got hardware support for decoding it then there's really no reason not to use it. It really is much better. As for the alternative, VP9.. ffmpeg doesn't support encoding that multi-threaded which, to me, means it's a non-option. And AMD gpu's don't even have support for it.

You guys know that HEVC aka H.265 is already yesterdays news right?

JEM is the path forward unto a new and enlightened experience.

Overview on page 15: dvb.org/resources/public/scene/dvb-scene49.pdf

Details: mpeg.chiariglione.org/sites/default/files/files/standards/parts/docs/w16698.zip

Any codec can store the same quality at half size.
Although, I've seen h265 encodes that look great at really low sizes.

So H.266 is coming right after AV1 and it's even better.

It really is quite sad that the PC platform is so far behind. My two year old tablet has HEVC hardware decoding and can play it in 1080p just fine. My two year old laptop can't even play 720p.

The very latest NVidia and AMD GPUs have hardware decoding but fairly new GPUs like the R9 390 doesn't have it. Ironically none of them do VP9 hardware decoding and that's also been a standard feature of cellphones and tablets for quite some time. Then again.. a $99 cellphone also has a good speaker and a 13MP camera these days while laptops usually have garbage speakers and a 1MP camera.

Not only that, but the article shits all over AV1:

>An experimental software model, AV1 derived from VP9, was released in 2016 and according to a recent study of an AV1 software snapshot, it is fully based on VP9 with two additional in-loop filters which are supposed to provide about 2.5% bitrate reduction on top of VP9. The additional filters are disabled by default, enabling results in compilation errors. Currently the AV1 software is a moving target with no official release versions.

>It can be seen that the AOM AV1 encoder performs even worse than the H.264/AVC JM reference encoder.

>2.5% bitrate reduction of VP9
>14.8% more overhead compared to H.264

AV1 BTFO.

Rendered obsolete by AV1

>Using profile
You're embarrassingly far from professional

LMAO, you got to be kidding me.

The AV1 bitstream format is scheduled to be frozen sometime around Q4 this year.

Let that sink in.

h.265 is here NOW. We can use it or not use it. We can test it and see how it works. We can tune it and get minor improvements.

AV1 hasn't even got a final bitstream format. We're pretty far away from something meant to be used. The "journalist" testing some experimental code couldn't even figure out how to compile it. Perhaps AV1 will be good, perhaps not. What we can say for sure is that there's really no point in looking at that format until this time next year.

I don't use profile, I use custom tuning for each sample, if you had read my comment properly you would have read that. But for purpose of testing, profiles and built-in tunes are a good reference start for a standardized comparison, now fuck off.

Why can't we add new codecs to pcs

It's a known fact that VP9 can't use some of the same algorithms that make HEVC as efficient as it is due to licensing issues. Furthermore, it takes about a decade each time a new H.26x format comes out due to research and development. AV1 is just trying to cobble together a fully "free" codec that is somewhat comparable to HEVC.


Oh and also:
>The "journalist" testing some experimental code couldn't even figure out how to compile it.

See: >Benjamin Bross is a Project Manager at the Video Coding & Analytics Department of the Fraunhofer Institute for Telecommunications - Heinrich Hertz Institute, Berlin

Next time try to actually read the article before autistically flailing against the keyboard.

My laptop is loud when using it so I always download h264, also have to force h264 on youtube because vp9 makes it run kinda hot too.

addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/h264ify/

Absolutely not a meme if you have at least marginally decent hardware.
I've been slowly replacing my collection from AVC to HEVC (not re-encoding but getting new HEVC encodes from bluray sources) and it's been great. I've managed to greatly increase the size of my collection without needing more storage space thanks to HEVC savings.
Quality-wise it's simply fantastic. Just find a release group who knows what they're doing.

You have no idea what you are doing. You also probably have eyecancer.

I know it's not the place to ask this, but could you tell me the difference between h264_nvenc and libx264? Is there a significant difference in quality? Hardware encoding is 200x faster for me

>Is there a significant difference in quality?
Can't you find this out by just looking at the results?

GPU encoding is basically for live streaming. Shit quality for archiving compared to x264.

>reencoding lossy shit
retard

>not shooting with black magic ursa in raw

> professional encoder
more like literal retard

>Just find a release group who knows what they're doing.

no release group that is worth downloading is using h265

>group that is worth downloading
>still using outdated and inefficient codec

t. public tracker pleb

>who needs h264 when every release group worth downloading uses xvid

every hevc encoder is curry as fuck yify shit

sorry but the Tsar of encoding, daiz already did tests and h265 HEVC is better than h264. Not to mention latest nvidia video cards have support for HW 10,12 bit decoding

AV1 is still a meme

AV1 isn't even finished yet so it's pretty stupid to complain about its usability.

What a pile of clickbait crap xDDDDDDD

'journalism'

Quite a few of them are, but definitely not all of them.

Why aren't animu torrents encoded with h.265? There's literally no noticeable difference (in animu) and the end result is almost half the file size.

It's fairly new so very few people know how to fine tune it. h.264, on the other hand, is what everyone knows how to use. It's also much more computationally expensive to encode.

There are, you just have to know where to look.
There's no noticeable difference in film too, if done properly.

It's not very mainstream yet because it doesn't run well on VLC and on most people's toasters.

I'm pretty sure that most people would have a cpu powerful enough to software decode a 1080p main 10 file.

underwater did HEVC releases

Most normies have facebook machines that can't handle HEVC.

normies use crunchyroll, not fansubs

HEVC is fine but encoders try so hard to make it look like garbade. If only they reduce the file size like 30-40% compared to the x264 it would be fine, but they try to reduce it like 100% at minimum.

Crunchyroll uses fansubs. They have almost no professional translators.

>Streaming

HEVC hardware encoding on GTX 10xx GPUs is fast but absolute shit, even with tweaked settings to maximize quality at any speed cost. Most streaming software doesn't support H265 yet.

CPU encoding at 30+ fps is only possible at settings that render it inferior to H264 presets of comparable speed.

>4K HDR

No content and no point. Unless your eyes are 10cm or less away from the screen, you're not going to be able to see the black space between pixels on 1080p screen. HDR is not supported by any TVs or monitors, unless you're willing to shell out massive bucks. What's marketed as 'HDR' is typically bullshit, where the screen can't even display 10-bit color let alone achieve the contrast ratio required. I don't believe there's a TV or monitor in existence that supports the full Rec. 2020 color space.

>Re-encoding H264 videos to save space

Waste of time and money (electricity cost + hardware wear). Re-encodes will always be inferior to the original, and you'll never get the original back unless you download it again.

>Sharing small-sized videos

The point of sharing small-sized clips is to save time. H265 encoding requires lots of time, and the best reduction you can get is only 50%.

~100kbps-1000kbps clips do a significantly better job of retaining watchable quality than H264 does, and is the only niche of any practical use.

my.mixtape.moe/eyoeoh.mkv

my.mixtape.moe/mlbchd.mp4

AOM is shit btw

>AOM is shit btw

What did he mean by this?

What

Most of their translation staff are former fansubbers

600MB 720p movies look passable, so that's OK in my book.
I don't think you can get the same quality with h.264.

so they are no longer fansubbing neets

Meant AV1, but AOM are shit too

Made wild claims about 50%+ bitrate saving over HEVC instead of actually getting any work done. How long's it been now since we were supposed to get Daala? I think it's about 4 years now, and all they've done since then is wrapped up Daala and presented it under a new name

That doesn't mean their quality improved.

The quality is of course better than any cartel subs who dare to localize jokes or remove them

I haven't seen anything. I see HEVC h.265 encodes out there and they're hit or miss. The space savings are nice but that's it. I've been ignoring them mostly since it's not finalized and it looks like others might surpass it at some point like AV1.

Yeah but I mean it hasn't even been released yet. Their current ETA is something like Q4 2017, presumably because they took the whole thing back to the drawing board instead of releasing something that's trash.

Are they actually incompetent or just slow? I'm actually waiting on AV1 to encode a ton of shit, so I hope it ends up being at least slightly better than H265 once it goes stable.

>The space savings are nice but that's it.
What else did you expect?
Most sources are bluray and h.264 anyway, so it's not going to have better colors and stuff.

Total meme. Just stick with H264 until hardware acceleration for H265/HEVC becomes more ubiquitous

>As of the version 2.3
Guess you are talking about x265. For a "professional" you seem to think H.265 (the standard) is just x265 and can be used interchangeably.

Gonna be awhile, here is me encoding 1080p recently with AV1 in pretty much default mode. I have a FX-6300 which is certainly not cutting edge but fast enough currently. Despite telling it 6 threads it was single core the entire time. After quite a bit of time I was 75 frames in and encoding 1.5 frame per minute. So I just quit. This picture is from April of this year.

With Super Slow preset in x264 @1080p, I tend to average 6-10fps depending on content.

AV1 is going to be better than HEVC, and not bogged down by the JEWS at MPEG-LA and the other license parties in the HEVC group.
AV1 will have won this competition by 2019, screencap this.

Now that I look at it I think at the bottom, the 75 counts the look ahead, and the 50 stood for 50 frames encoded so far.

I tried decoding it and got some pretty messed up color problems. Like decoding the raw video with the wrong color scheme so I just dropped it.

>professional encoder
>very slow preset
>doesn't even mention 10-bit encoders
Fuck off you troll.

For everyone else, yes you should switch. Latest snowfag x265 encoder is at least 50% more efficient than H264.

You can get it here and see for yourself:
builds.x265.eu

>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.

Can someone link me to some AV1 documentation for reference please? I'll look up at the beginning of this thread too, but I would like some solid information as to why it's a potential standard moving forward

t. Another professional encoder who's org is mulling over HEVC vs VP9 currently

I'm being general about the lack of quality for the space. I'm usually better off grabbing 576p DVD's in some cases. This is or was the case for certain HD encodes and scene groups too. I'm not really saving space or enough.

>Anything faster will give you bigger file sizes and anything slower will give you slower encoding speeds.

It's basically VP10, but with every major company under the sun pouring their resources and unfinished projects into it.

Daiz is an idiot. A good encoder is the one that master Avisynth, not x264 tune settings. There are plenty of people that have more knowledge in Avisynth than him.
hurr.

With proper tuning flat anime may have better savings than regular x264 encodes but it still have problems with detail retention of low contrast detailed textures, no matter how much you tweak the AQ.

There are thousands of Atom based notebooks out there. (Celerons Nxxx) Those things can't decode HEVC 1080p natively.

>and the best reduction you can get is only 50%.
You were doing fine until you said this bullshit.


>100kbps clips do a significantly better job of retaining watchable quality than H264 does,
>100kbps
>watchable

Even at 720p that is impossible unless you are legally blind or have eyecancer.

>my.mixtape.moe/mlbchd.mp4
smudged as fuck

>my.mixtape.moe/eyoeoh.mkv
Also pretty smudged but "passable". Now take a shot with the camera moving too and watch the thing fall apart quickly and the bitrate ramp to much more than 1000kbps.

Only reason those look remotely decent is because the first one was made digitally with good light, so no grain. The second one looks degrained, but the only way to get H265 to deliver decent quality on a full lenght movie with less than 2000kbps average, would be to degrain the whole thing with tr=2 or tr=3 with SMdegrain which is painfully slow.


>600MB 720p movies look passable,
Enjoying your eyecancer yet?

H.265 is fire.

holy fuck, what a fucking retard.

Paid MPEG-LA shills detected. Literally contrarian fucks who are against an unprecedented decision to go 'open' by many major companies.

They haven't finalized the bitstream yet(?) but there's already an encoder and you can play the output with mpv

Highly doubt they're going to go from inferior to H265, to beating it by 25%+ in a few months

Is there anything wrong with that? I'm open to improving my guide.

>Brought to you by YIFY® Standardisation Committee

>you seem to think H.265 (the standard) is just x265 and can be used interchangeably.

Of course I know the difference, Even if I distractely switched the terms, I have never seen a person that know about different tunings that doesn't know the differece. If you assumed I didn't you are an idiot. And is everyone uses x265 because it is by far the best free H265 implementation around, now fuck off.

>doesn't even mention 10-bit encoders
Are you retarded or what? I'm not fucking Daiz who is a total autist with 10 bit encodes even when they are not necessarily needed (grainy high bitrate sources) and only kill compatibility (for H264 standard)

>Latest snowfag x265 encoder is at least 50% more efficient than H264. At what profile? What settings?
>PSNR graphic
>WHAT IS FUCKING PSY
>Generally 10-bit will help out with color banding and improve compression efficiency
>he feel for the 10bit banding meme

See, you are the one that have no idea what you are talking about now.

I think he was pointing out the "well, duh" nature of that sentence. It's like saying "things that are more expensive to produce will cost more money".

>inferior to H265

Source? Isn't VP9 already basically on par with H265?

>HEVC Main 10 is well supported through hardware
>can finally watch my cartoons in a normal way once the groups start using HEVC
Fucking hell. Anime groups constantly overestimate the quality their users will put up with - 8-bit H264 was more than good enough considering most people just stream animes in godawful quality online. But no, 10-bit had to be used with inane encoding settings, killing all hardware compatibility in the process.

God, I hate public anime release/encoding groups so much.

>Highly doubt they're going to go from inferior to H265, to beating it by 25%+ in a few months

Care to elaborate on your bullshit?

Here's my sources:
bitmovin.com/bitmovin-supports-av1-encoding-vod-live-joins-alliance-open-media/

If you need something TODAY just go with h.265.

AV1 is still bogged down in the weeds.

Here is the status of the codec as of January:
youtube.com/watch?v=lzPaldsmJbk

If you REALLY want to wait, then wait for JEM to be finalized: