Quality explanation

[blackblades]

I was looking for info about the quality of the anime. Like what's the difference between 10 bit and 8 bit and other types of words or whatever and what they mean. Also can you really see the difference between them. I couldn't find it so I was thinking that there should be an info topic on here explaining them and if it's on here can someone direct me to it.

[Darkshadow6400]

10bit and 8bit refer to the colour depth of the video. Currently the standard is 8bit, which some may consider 'good enough' but it limits the amount of colours that are reproduced, which can lead to very obvious visual issues, such as banding.

You can get a brief explanation here:
http://www.techhive.com/article/171223/10_bit_color.html

[Koby]

There is also

Which has some explanations and some image comparisons.

[Fishmonster]

Just to add if you were wondering aswell about AVC/x264/h264 and HEVC/x265/h.265 is different coding of a show. x265 is a newer type which has about 60% of the filesize as x264 with same quality (just video, this excludes the audio which is the same for both) , but if you want as high quality as possible people still go for x264 because it is said it has better quality if you want as high quality as possible.

 

And .mkv or .mp4 and that sorta stuff is just kinda the different packaging of video/audio/subs.

 

then there is the audio. which is usualy either flac og acc. flac has better sound, but acc has lower filesize. and there is a difference in kbps on the audio, which means 160kbps has lower quality then 192kbps but is offcorse smaller in filesize.

 

alongside the info you probably read about 8/10 bit, this should likely be enough to make an informed decision about what to choose when to download. you need to decide if you want quality over filesize or vice versa. Usually larger filesize means better quality, and you should decide what quality to sizeratio you prefer.

 

(someone please correct me if anything i say is wrong, cus i dont know much about this and i'm just trying to help inform and hopefully inform correctly )

 

Edit:

A way to decide what quality you want is just do download a couple of versions of the same show and see if you can see or hear the diference between them. if you cant notice any difference go for the smallest filsize. if you notice a difference and you want the one with larger filesize, keep that one. And if you notice a difference, but you think lower filesize is more important then quality just keep the series with lower filesize. (dont know if my rambling makes sense ). over time you'll be able to tell before you download which quality you want to go for.

 

For instance Kametsu's own releases, which are awesome btw, i usually dont need 1080p/flac and go for the 720p/acc releases cus of i personally feel the difference is not noticable enough for me to choose the 1080p version over the 720p version.

 

Edited January 13, 2017 by Fishmonster

[blackblades]

Thanks for the info fishmonster, still would be nice to have the info on the site then a link to another. Anyways what about bit rate. Heard bluray has like over 40 and downloads are like 1.5. Does it matter with anime? What about mini encodes? What about other meanings when it come down to stuff on this site.

Edited January 13, 2017 by blackblades

[Fishmonster]

no problemo

 

bit rate is how much bit("information") there is in every second on average on a video. this may vary from episode to episode, since some episodes have more movement so it needs more bitrate on average (or less, i dont remembre, logic dictates it should be more) to keep the same quality of the video as the other episodes. the reason is when people encode they set a crf (atleast at my basic level i just use crf), so when you set a crf (which is a constant quality) the video-encoding program decides the bitrate. crf is used to get about the same quality for all the episodes. higher crf means lower quality.

 

so bit rate may vary much from episode to episode, and from anime to anime.

 

I dont know where the limit for mini-encodes is but it has a high crf and im guessing about crf 25 and higher or something . i personally dont like mini's cus i can usualy see that the video is a bit "blocky" which is annoying. but if you prefer those, that is completely OK. mainly experience, combined with some basic knowledge will help you decide what version of the anime you want to get.

 

so you can see 1080p video which has much lower size than a 720p cus the 1080p has a much higher crf which means it has much lower bit rate.

 

hopefully someone who has more knowledge than me can create a short introduction to all the basics when it comes to video quality.

 

and if you want to know more, google is your friend but i agree that it would be nice to have a quick tutorial when it comes to video/audio quality.

 

and once again, you should not trust that all i say is a 100% correct. 

[blackblades]

1 hour ago, Fishmonster said:

no problemo

 

bit rate is how much bit("information") there is in every second on average on a video. this may vary from episode to episode, since some episodes have more movement so it needs more bitrate on average (or less, i dont remembre, logic dictates it should be more) to keep the same quality of the video as the other episodes. the reason is when people encode they set a crf (atleast at my basic level i just use crf), so when you set a crf (which is a constant quality) the video-encoding program decides the bitrate. crf is used to get about the same quality for all the episodes. higher crf means lower quality.

 

so bit rate may vary much from episode to episode, and from anime to anime.

 

I dont know where the limit for mini-encodes is but it has a high crf and im guessing about crf 25 and higher or something . i personally dont like mini's cus i can usualy see that the video is a bit "blocky" which is annoying. but if you prefer those, that is completely OK. mainly experience, combined with some basic knowledge will help you decide what version of the anime you want to get.

 

so you can see 1080p video which has much lower size than a 720p cus the 1080p has a much higher crf which means it has much lower bit rate.

 

hopefully someone who has more knowledge than me can create a short introduction to all the basics when it comes to video quality.

 

and if you want to know more, google is your friend but i agree that it would be nice to have a quick tutorial when it comes to video/audio quality.

 

and once again, you should not trust that all i say is a 100% correct. 

So with bit rate you'll see the difference when there's movement. I use to watch mini-encodes back then from skylord which the quality was great with low file size. I heard it was banned because of the great quality and low file size. I'm just trying to understand the meaning of most of the terms on here and as well quality and being able to see the difference.

[† Ryutai]

Bit rate is usually (some encoders have been known to produce encodes larger than the source lol) highest at source (Bluray or DVD for example) however these raws are usually rather large (ranges depending on whether it's from the JP or US source  e.g USBD m2ts for eureka seven is 223GB) so generally people tend to encode the video, in doing so sometimes fixing any issues like aliasing (rough jagged edges on lines that can be seen particularly on Cgi) or banding (where a colour ramp has clear breaks creating "bands" of colours instead of a smooth gradient) that was present in the original source while reducing the file size significantly. One cannot argue that some of the quality is lost during the process however if done properly it is not something you would notice, and often due to the filtering some reputable encoders apply the encode produced can often look better than said source however this is only true if the encoder knows what they are doing. Mini encodes on the other hand, are usually re-encodes (this means the video source was already an existing "lossy" encode which has then been put through another lossy conversion) this is generally frowned upon from a quality perspective as it pretty much if not certainly guarantee's a worse result in comparison to the original encode. There are some mini-encoders who encode straight from the source this is far better due to only one lossy conversion however it would not be surprising if you came across compression artifacts or blocking in these encodes as the bit rate allocated particularly in scenes with grain or high motion will not be high enough to maintain some of the details at source. Basically, if you want quality, avoid anything under mini encodes (that is not to say they don't have their place but quality, is not their forte). In terms of video codecs (AVC (h.264) or HEVC (h.265) for example) generally, h.264 is the better option in terms of quality as HEVC still has its issues. To yield good results encoding times are very long, so most encodes you see with HEVC in the usually won't have allocated this time to encoding the video and so to generalise the result is usually less favourable than the AVC equivalent although the file size should generally be smaller. The main issue with HEVC is that it seems to denoise the video (destroys grain and fine details in the video) this can be circumvented but as I said it requires a long processing time and a good encoder to do so. 10 bit vs 8 bit, well best way to put this is compatibility vs quality, the 10-bit colour depth helps to reduce banding during the encoding process due to more of the colour spectrum being utilised hence producing smoother gradients. However there is currently no hardware support (HEVC 10bit is starting to appear iirc) especially for h.264 so this means software decoding is necessary, in other words, you usually will need a device with reasonable specs say a laptop or PC to play the encodes properly. Audio codecs generally one of 3 will be used there are many others available though. AAC typically used on 720p as a standard sounds nearly if not identical to the original source if encoded properly (usually ~128kbs per channel e.g 2.0 stereo may be 256Kbs or up to 320Kb's) however this is a lossy codec and so some information from the original stream is lost (admittedly as I said most people wouldn't even notice though) this codec is preferable when encoded straight from the lossless Bluray audio. FLAC is the lossless codec generally used for archive quality releases this will nearly always have a higher bit-rate than the other codecs as it is lossless. The bitrate, however, depends on the bit-depth of the track. 24 bit has a much higher bitrate per channel and some consider it to be overkill (I personally would not have the hardware sufficient to hear a difference) worth noting some Blurays only have 20bit audio to begin with anyways. 16 bit FLAC on the other hand has a much lower bitrate and is still a lossless format. FLAC tends to be the standard with 1080p (not all) although this often leads to a big jump in file size depending on the amount of tracks and channels. Finally you might see AC3 this is usually found on DVD's and the like and much like AAC if encoded properly will sound just as good as the lossless but is in its own right a lossy codec, similar to AAC the higher the bit rate the higher the quality of the track. Right so video and audio quality done what's left hmm, subtitles I guess, well generally most releases you will find on here will utilize fansubs which are usually styled and contain lyrics for the OP/ED sometimes English sometimes with romaji and sometimes both with kfx, try and go for the more reputable groups if you are looking for better translation typesetting and styling. Oh also if you didn't know Dual audio English and Japanese audio, subbed just Japanese dubbed just English.

 

TL;DR

Basically quality releases are larger in file size due to retaining finer details in video and audio, however, if you can stomach the larger file size I recommend getting the 1080p Dual-FLAC (preferably with Hi10 in the name = high-profile 10 bit colour depth) releases from reputable encoders or remuxers for more modern anime. older stuff download at your own discretion some warrant the higher resolution some definitely don't.

720p is fine for most but again grab from the reputable sources and preferably grab the BD versions.

Mini encodes only if you haven't heard that hard drives aren't that expensive

10bit>8bit personally

 

There is lots more I could mention, however time is limited and I don't fancy typing for ages >_< I myself do not actually know that much about all the intricate filtering or encoding settings, so if you wish to learn about those you may want to read up on those yourself as its far more complex and intricate to explain. Also, apologies if some of this doesn't make too much sense I just typed it all at once :3 anyways if you need anything else clarifying just say and I will try my best to explain.

 

oh also if you get the chance look at some frame by frame comparisons and you will usually be able to see clear differences between quality.

 

Edit: just ask Hark0n he knows his stuff  

Edited January 13, 2017 by Moby JJ

[Fishmonster]

Just now, Moby JJ said:

Mini encodes on the other hand, are usually re-encodes (this means the video source was already an existing "lossy" encode which has then been put through another lossy conversion) this is generally frowned upon from a quality perspective as it pretty much if not certainly guarantee's a worse result in comparison to the original encode.

 

I always though they called it mini cus they encoded a previous encode into a "small file size". So say you have a 24minute video @ 2 GB and encode it down to, say 1.5 GB, which should if done correctly still should have pretty good quality (and ofc there as you say, will be quality loss), does it still count as mini?

 

 

 

[† Ryutai]

1 minute ago, Fishmonster said:

 

I always though they called it mini cus they encoded a previous encode into a "small file size". So say you have a 24minute video @ 2 GB and encode it down to, say 1.5 GB, which should if done correctly still should have pretty good quality (and ofc there as you say, will be quality loss), does it still count as mini?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pretty sure just mini just refers to small file size (miniature in this case I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ) if the 2GB file is an encode then yes that would be a mini encode and will most likely have a notable quality drop despite the disparity in file size not being that large. Think of it from a logical stand point, if the source was 20GB and you encode it down to a 5GB file a ton of raw data has been lost. The data that is left was taken from the source as a whole though hence the quality need not be bad at all as most of the missing information in this case would hopefully be redundant data, whereas in your example where an existing file is re-encoded the source file itself already has a massive reduction in information to draw upon such that any more information that is lost has a larger effect on quality and hence you cannot expect the result to be identical or even close to the original source or the existing encode for that matter. For whats its worth a re-encode "could" probably look somewhat close to the encode if a ton of bit rate is thrown at it to help retain every scrap of detail from the original encode but in this case the result will still be worse and most likely the file size would end up being larger lol. Basically re-encoding is just losing more information from an already lossy source ergo quality loss is inevitable. Again not hating on mini-encodes but they certainly don't exist for the sake of quality that's for sure . Hope that answers your question. 

[Fishmonster]

Just now, Moby JJ said:

Pretty sure just mini just refers to small file size (miniature in this case I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ) if the 2GB file is an encode then yes that would be a mini encode and will most likely have a notable quality drop despite the disparity in file size not being that large. Think of it from a logical stand point, if the source was 20GB and you encode it down to a 5GB file a ton of raw data has been lost. The data that is left was taken from the source as a whole though hence the quality need not be bad at all as most of the missing information in this case would hopefully be redundant data, whereas in your example where an existing file is re-encoded the source file itself already has a massive reduction in information to draw upon such that any more information that is lost has a larger effect on quality and hence you cannot expect the result to be identical or even close to the original source or the existing encode for that matter. For whats its worth a re-encode "could" probably look somewhat close to the encode if a ton of bit rate is thrown at it to help retain every scrap of detail from the original encode but in this case the result will still be worse and most likely the file size would end up being larger lol. Basically re-encoding is just losing more information from an already lossy source ergo quality loss is inevitable. Again not hating on mini-encodes but they certainly don't exist for the sake of quality that's for sure . Hope that answers your question.

 

See @blackblades  I said not to trust me. there i go giving you false information *hang my head in shame, and quietly exit Kametsu. Will cautiously show up again when my embaressment has died down and peak my head in and see if everyone has forgotten my mistake

[† Ryutai]

Just now, Fishmonster said:

 

See @blackblades  I said not to trust me. there i go giving you false information *hang my head in shame, and quietly exit Kametsu. Will cautiously show up again when my embaressment has died down and peak my head in and see if everyone has forgotten my mistake

 

nah your all good honestly good on you for trying to help fellow members understand stuff, no need to be embarrassed at all. Tbh all of this discussion depends on how much stock you put in quality, in my case I like the bast available but I know others really aren't that fussed. So in a certain sense some people may agree that a re-encode can look good but from my perspective it's a definite no. 

[Fishmonster]

Just now, Moby JJ said:

nah your all good honestly good on you for trying to help fellow members understand stuff, no need to be embarrassed at all. Tbh all of this discussion depends on how much stock you put in quality, in my case I like the bast available but I know others really aren't that fussed. So in a certain sense some people may agree that a re-encode can look good but from my perspective it's a definite no. 

 

Just FYI, if im not happy with the file size i sometime re-encode (just for personal use and if the only version i find is a 1080p/flac of a show i dont really care about) and i cant se a "noticable" difference. I know there is a qualityloss but comparing just by watching it (not frame by frame) I feel i cant se much difference on a 65" TV. But if it is a show that i enjoy i keep the large file size. (but dont really know why since with my eyes i cant usually tell any difference.)

and by saying that i should definitely hang my head in shame and exit Kametsu (BTW never take anything i say seriously, cus i dont know how to be serious).

 

But like I mentioned earlier Mr Blackblades, you should find what quality you want, and dont care what anyone else tells you

 

Edit:

 

Know im getting a little off topic, sorry bout that...

 

And also Blackblades, trust people like Moby JJ, Koby, MK, Catar, Etzimal and the rest of the encoders here much more than people like me. Havnt watched anime for more than 6 months-ish, and in a couple of years i migh end up regreting the crappy choices i made today by keeping lower quality encodes. And harddrives are quite cheap, so there shouldnt really be a problem with file size.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Fishmonster

[Hark0n]

2 hours ago, Moby JJ said:

The bitrate, however, depends on the bit-depth of the track. 24 bit has a much higher bitrate per channel and is usually unnecessary as most blurays only have 20bit audio to begin with,16 bit FLAC on the other hand has a much lower bitrate and is still a lossless format and so tends to be the standard with 1080p (not all) releases.

BDs (BluRay discs) having 20bit audio is misleading information. As far as I can tell, this only applies to English audio track in Funimation releases (Japanese audio is 16bit) and even then there are exceptions (like Akira). Sentai Filmworks usually have 24bit for both tracks, VIZ seems to mix it up (some 16bit and some 24bit) and AoA sometimes does not even include lossless audio. And there are cases when audio quality is inconsistent throughout release, like in US release of The Twelve Kingdoms (episodes 15-18 and 22-33 had 24bit English audio, while the rest was 16bit).

And that is just the US releases, if we look at Japanese BDs, we get unusual setups (2.1, 4.0, 4.1 and 6.1) and sometimes 96kHz.

[† Ryutai]

Just now, Hark0n said:

BDs (BluRay discs) having 20bit audio is misleading information. As far as I can tell, this only applies to English audio track in Funimation releases (Japanese audio is 16bit) and even then there are exceptions (like Akira). Sentai Filmworks usually have 24bit for both tracks, VIZ seems to mix it up (some 16bit and some 24bit) and AoA sometimes does not even include lossless audio. And there are cases when audio quality is inconsistent throughout release, like in US release of The Twelve Kingdoms (episodes 15-18 and 22-33 had 24bit English audio, while the rest was 16bit).

And that is just the US releases, if we look at Japanese BDs, we get unusual setups (2.1, 4.0, 4.1 and 6.1) and sometimes 96kHz.

 

 

You are the master my friend you know far more than I  that's fair enough in my experience I have only ever converted tracks that were 20bit as quoted by Eac3to, all be it that experience is rather limited. Thanks for the clarification, in this post I was mainly just trying to breeze over the bit depths merely mentioning 24 bit is considerably larger so forgive my blatant over simplification and generalizations. 

[blackblades]

Great info guys, also its all good @Fishmonster. So in anime if the picture is jumpy and not smooth that's because of the bit rate right. So format profiles like L.4.1 and 5.1 etc is the same as 10bit. I was on a hardware limit which I'm still kinda am.