JohnFlower Posted February 8, 2014 Report Share Posted February 8, 2014 With that said using the law of equivalent exchange i mean how far can you go with compression w/o losing quality. I dont think you can keep the quality of the BD and downgrade it's size becuz the size is packed with the quality. Isn't the reason you can compress the video is becuz your skimping some of the video quality? Again ima noob but logically i cant see how you can compress and retain quality. Its not like there just a bunch of useless data being used in the BD's is there?An encode of anything is a 'downgrade'. No matter how you look at it, you're losing the original quality. Sure you can filter away defects, but in the end you're only destroying what was originally there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MysterySword Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 As the program I use to encode has added x265 support, I'll take a shot at it out of curiosity. I'll run it first on Towa no Quon and compare 10-bit x264 to x265. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aMvEL Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 x265 is alpha-grade quality as of now, it's nowhere near "feature-complete", and is not close to being as optimized as x264.It's also worth nothing that the CRF-scale is not transferable from x264 to x265 - so x264 CRF16 is not equal to CRF16 x265 quality-wise. Give it a year or two, then we'll start to see some quality encodes using x265. In the meantime, one can follow the ongoing discussion on Doom9.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikezilla2 Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 what free GUI software can be used ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hark0n Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 what free GUI software can be used ? MediaCoder has support for H.265/HEVC, but I got error when encoding, so I can't say how good it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MysterySword Posted March 12, 2014 Report Share Posted March 12, 2014 what free GUI software can be used ?MediaCoder has support for H.265/HEVC, but I got error when encoding, so I can't say how good it is. I use MediaCoder, but you want version 0.8.29.5599 or above of MediaCoder for x265. The few versions before where they added x265 had some errors. Also, Subpixel Motion Estimation cannot be over 7 for x265, for some reason. And only some modes of encoding work (Variable Bitrate, Average Bitrate, but not 2/3-pass). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikezilla2 Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 what about super ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeavenlyClassic Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 ahh so thats why i see this popping up on torrentsalways wondered how it looked so HD whilst being small file and playing on wii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnFlower Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 ahh so thats why i see this popping up on torrents always wondered how it looked so HD whilst being small file and playing on wiiOnly idiots are using it for release spec encodes. Just read the comments on those torrents... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badman Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 With that said using the law of equivalent exchange i mean how far can you go with compression w/o losing quality. I dont think you can keep the quality of the BD and downgrade it's size becuz the size is packed with the quality. Isn't the reason you can compress the video is becuz your skimping some of the video quality? Again ima noob but logically i cant see how you can compress and retain quality. Its not like there just a bunch of useless data being used in the BD's is there? An encode of anything is a 'downgrade'. No matter how you look at it, you're losing the original quality. Sure you can filter away defects, but in the end you're only destroying what was originally there. To be clear, encodes reduce quality by nature. An encode that goes quickly will reduce quality in a more noticable way than a slow encode. That extra time (as i understand it) is used by the software to reduce quality/bit depth in areas that wont be noticable. The more time given to this process, if done correctly, the more accurate (and close to the original) it will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psionx Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 With that said using the law of equivalent exchange i mean how far can you go with compression w/o losing quality. I dont think you can keep the quality of the BD and downgrade it's size becuz the size is packed with the quality. Isn't the reason you can compress the video is becuz your skimping some of the video quality? Again ima noob but logically i cant see how you can compress and retain quality. Its not like there just a bunch of useless data being used in the BD's is there? An encode of anything is a 'downgrade'. No matter how you look at it, you're losing the original quality. Sure you can filter away defects, but in the end you're only destroying what was originally there. To be clear, encodes reduce quality by nature. An encode that goes quickly will reduce quality in a more noticable way than a slow encode. That extra time (as i understand it) is used by the software to reduce quality/bit depth in areas that wont be noticable. The more time given to this process, if done correctly, the more accurate (and close to the original) it will be. longer encodes can give better quality but in h.264's case that can mean using higer settings which leads to incerasd complexity for the decoder to decode that can cause artifacts by it self. for that reason it's better to let avisynth filters do the deblocking & noise filtering. it also helps to disable cabac whenever possible. plus too many people make the mistake of using the "High" profile with a low bit rate when they should be using "baseline". "high" profile is designed to work at a bitrate of 42,000 with 1280x720 video. no one in their right mind would download a video with a bitrate that high though much less upload it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaqsalazar Posted April 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 With that said using the law of equivalent exchange i mean how far can you go with compression w/o losing quality. I dont think you can keep the quality of the BD and downgrade it's size becuz the size is packed with the quality. Isn't the reason you can compress the video is becuz your skimping some of the video quality? Again ima noob but logically i cant see how you can compress and retain quality. Its not like there just a bunch of useless data being used in the BD's is there? An encode of anything is a 'downgrade'. No matter how you look at it, you're losing the original quality. Sure you can filter away defects, but in the end you're only destroying what was originally there. To be clear, encodes reduce quality by nature. An encode that goes quickly will reduce quality in a more noticable way than a slow encode. That extra time (as i understand it) is used by the software to reduce quality/bit depth in areas that wont be noticable. The more time given to this process, if done correctly, the more accurate (and close to the original) it will be. longer encodes can give better quality but in h.264's case that can mean using higer settings which leads to incerasd complexity for the decoder to decode that can cause artifacts by it self. for that reason it's better to let avisynth filters do the deblocking & noise filtering. it also helps to disable cabac whenever possible. plus too many people make the mistake of using the "High" profile with a low bit rate when they should be using "baseline". "high" profile is designed to work at a bitrate of 42,000 with 1280x720 video. no one in their right mind would download a video with a bitrate that high though much less upload it. yes but encoding in baseline is way to inefficient, encoding on baseline with the highest encoding settings there is a lot of noticable detail loss. Especially when you compare it to a encode, encoded in High profile. Now if you want good quality encode you should never encode in baseline, regardless of what you said about bitrate is irreverent compare to point of encoding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MysterySword Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) I've encoded the first episode of Attack on Titan in x265 (1080p) for anyone that wants a look at the x265 codec > http://filecloud.io/rixt3ajz Banding as 8-bit x264 would have (as it is 8-bit as well), but other than that, it looks really good. They're still working on the 10-bit x265, from what I hear. Edited May 23, 2014 by MysterySword Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovebump Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) x264 is good I don't know why people still use that and haven't made the move to x265... File size isn't an issue for me though considering my connection speed is 120Mb/s so I always go for quality over file size but it is good to see compression advancing. i would say people are not using it because id expect not alot of hdtvs and stand alone players can play x265 , not everybody watches there content via there pc Edited May 23, 2014 by lovebump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick1109 Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 x264 is good I don't know why people still use that and haven't made the move to x265... File size isn't an issue for me though considering my connection speed is 120Mb/s so I always go for quality over file size but it is good to see compression advancing. i would say people are not using it because id expect not alot of hdtvs and stand alone players can play x265 , not everybody watches there content via there pc Not only are most devices NOT compatible for x265, they are not even compatible with high levels of x264. Most devices, like TV's for example, cant play a video if it was encoded above Level 4.1. There has to be consumer demand for Manufacturer's to update their device's codecs for increased compatibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asder Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 h265 is more for 4k i think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkDream787 Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 I personally dont care for the x265. If you want your 16.0 CRF to make smaller file sizes then increase your qpmin setting to 16 and increase your qpmax setting to 60+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now