Ripping Blu-Rays II - Page 193 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #5761 of 6481 Old 04-28-2014, 09:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
techflaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuna View Post

I come here posting asking a question and I get silly answers like, look around everyone has storage who needs it kind of silly answers.

Which like pepar pointed out could have easily been answered by you doing a quick Google search. And the only silly thing I've read here so far was your bogus assertion that people are foolish for not replacing a widely supported mature codec with a more efficient one in it's infancy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuna View Post

As with new technology and bar being increased you cant expect old hardware to play everything.

Noone does. However, I do expect more hardware to support x.265 before making the switch. I'm certainly not dumping my WDTV for a new codec just to save some storage space (that I have plenty of anyway).


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Things can only get better
techflaws is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #5762 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 05:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 264 Post(s)
Liked: 354
Whenever I read claims of "same quality but at half the file size", which essentially means half the bitrate, I just smile briefly and move on to the next post.
Phrehdd likes this.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #5763 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 05:37 AM
Senior Member
 
chuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

Whenever I read claims of "same quality but at half the file size", which essentially means half the bitrate, I just smile briefly and move on to the next post.

Glad you are moving on to the next post without reading much about this codec. Ignorance is bliss wink.gif
chuna is offline  
post #5764 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 05:40 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,028
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuna View Post

Glad you are moving on to the next post without reading much about this codec. Ignorance is bliss wink.gif

Now we are in complete agreement. wink.gif


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- it's never done!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
pepar is offline  
post #5765 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 05:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
dbone1026's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 11,312
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 71
I personally am waiting for H.266 to gain some traction

Cheers,
Damian

MSS.net blog (contributing editor) -
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Windows Entertainment and Connected Home MVP 2010-2012

dbone1026 is offline  
post #5766 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 06:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 264 Post(s)
Liked: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuna View Post

Glad you are moving on to the next post without reading much about this codec. Ignorance is bliss wink.gif
You assume I know nothing about the subject matter.
You know what they say about assuming and the assumer.

You are obviously not aware of the long discussions about re-encoding BluRays that have gone on for pages earlier in this thread. It's not that we are not receptive to new encoding ideas -- it's just that we've heard it all before and argued about it endlessly with no resolution. There are a lot of seasoned veterans of the re-coding wars in this thread.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #5767 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 08:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ScottJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 1,414
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

Whenever I read claims of "same quality but at half the file size", which essentially means half the bitrate, I just smile briefly and move on to the next post.

In other words, you assume that compression technology never advances.
ScottJ is offline  
post #5768 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 09:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 264 Post(s)
Liked: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottJ View Post

In other words, you assume that compression technology never advances.
Another one with the assumptions -- tsk, tsk -- your "other words", not mine.

I adopt a conservative approach. A wait and see attitude. I've seen many a new tech fly in on a wave of hype only to crash and burn.
As others have already posted -- let it ride and see where it goes and how much traction it gains.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #5769 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 10:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ScottJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 1,414
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

I adopt a conservative approach. A wait and see attitude. I've seen many a new tech fly in on a wave of hype only to crash and burn.
As others have already posted -- let it ride and see where it goes and how much traction it gains.

That's certainly a reasonable approach. But why then the condescending post about "smile briefly and move on"? Are you still using MPEG1? You insinuated that it's not reasonable to expect the same quality at half the bitrate. But that has happened many times in recent history as codecs have advanced. MPEG1 to MPEG2 to MPEG4 and now h.265.
ScottJ is offline  
post #5770 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 11:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 264 Post(s)
Liked: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottJ View Post

That's certainly a reasonable approach. But why then the condescending post about "smile briefly and move on"?
Because the posts are usually about re-coding a BluRay with Handbrake and H.264 to some greatly reduced size while claiming there is no difference in PQ. I have a 65" plasma, I see the difference. But then this has been argued multiple times and the only thing that is clear is that it is a matter of personal preference -- so I smile and move on.

As has been noted, re-coding a lossy compressed video with another lossy compression codec will result in degradation. I've seen it happen when re-coding HDTV MPEG-2 --> H.264 and it will happen with attempts to re-code BluRay H.264 --> H.265. H.265 may be absolutely wonderful when applied to the uncompressed full-resolution master but as soon as people start talking about re-compressing an already compressed BluRay to half the size with no loss in quality -- "I just smile briefly and move on to the next post".
Phrehdd likes this.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #5771 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 11:58 AM
Senior Member
 
chadsdsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 21
No matter what format the original source is, the file will be degraded if it is compressed again, regardless of how great the codec used is. Its not like true hd/dts ma audio where all the information is still there.....its gone. With that said, H.265 looks promising with regards to the efficiency in which it compresses to the point where it can take a file and compress it much better than previous methods at the same level of compression. The problem, as has been stated, is the ability to replay it on playback devices. At this point, compressing something with H.265 means it can only be played back on computer software with new codec support or whatever other media player comes out to support it, but no existing players (wdtv,bd players, roku etc) have that functionality, so you would be limiting it usefulness. I don't think H.265 will be that prevalent until we seem more 4k stuff, ie. 4k/uhd blu ray. I don't even bother with compressing because, as has been mentioned, storage is relatively cheap and I figure my next major tv purchase will be some sort of uhd tv (hopefully oled) and if I will be upscaling to that tv, I want to have as much info there for the scaler to use, even if the difference is not very noticeable now.
chadsdsmith is offline  
post #5772 of 6481 Old 04-29-2014, 12:22 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,028
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 155
There is lossless compression where the reconstructed signal is identical to the original. And then there is perceptual encoding where the differences can be measured but not ... perceived. New technology/new algorithms/etc keep moving the latter forward. Typically, more and more computer power is needed, but we certainly have that. (Intel would *love* to have us all re-encode our hi-def media!) I agree with chadsdsmith that H.265's time will come when our reach has exceeded our is grasp, i.e. when our content is so dense that it strains our delivery pipes, both macro and micro. Voila, a new codec to winnow it down to fit our pipes.

But, alas, that is not today, next week or next year. Three to five years maybe. Many people can't tell the difference between DVD video and Blu-ray video. Beyond that, most people can't tell the difference between streamed "hi-def" movies and Blu-ray.

But it is a good omen for H.265 that fanbois are starting to pop up and evangelize it.

Jeff


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- it's never done!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
pepar is offline  
post #5773 of 6481 Old 04-30-2014, 07:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
DotJun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 916
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuna View Post

And have you used it to make this judgement that it is full of kinks? I use XBMC Gotham build and it plays H.265 just beautifully. So for someone like me, I think it is a valid question rather than says who uses it and when its available with lots of adoption.
It's your installed codecs and not the front end that allows you to play on whatever player you so choose to use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Most of us here are not challenged for storage space, and are ripping to lossless without re-encoding. There are exceptions for those of us who need lower bitrates for mobile devices. Read a few pages back for some typical server sizes ... they will make your jaw drop.

Sooo, we don't need no stinkin' compression! smile.gif

Jeff
there are other reasons other than smaller file sizes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by olyteddy View Post

Then you sir are deluding yourself. If you take an already compressed codec like AVC or MPEG2 and re-compress it using another lossy codec then it will lose quality. Only if you have access to the original uncompressed raw video will you see an advantage to compressing in H.265. You may end up with a smaller file, but as many have pointed out storage is cheap and do you really want to degrade the picture and possibly suffer compatibility issues for the sake of a few bytes?
I think most people that compress are talking about perceptual loss. A good encoder is going to make most of its compression during fast blurry scenes where you won't be able to perceptually tell the difference. Unless of course you watch the scene frame by frame, but I don't watch movies that way, do you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by olyteddy View Post

And we're all saying there's no need to further compress a Blu-Ray unless you're trying to watch it on a sub-par screen like an iPhone or a tablet. By definition a 'Rip' is a one-to-one copy made from a disk. No re-encoding or additional compression. Remember, what a lossy compression takes away can never be recovered, and Blu-Ray is already pretty heavily compressed...
you should take a look at some re-compressed material from people that know what they're doing before making bold statements like "you can tell it is re compressed on anything but the smallest mobile screens".

EDIT: This is a general rant. Not meant for just oly smile.gif

I wasn't trying to start anything when I asked about the merits of x265. I am genuinely interested as the last time I looked at it was many months ago when it was still sub par.

I was hoping to get answers to questions like: x265 baseline vs raising subme levels in x264? This last part is going to be snippy as I am so tired of these same old remarks against compression, so here goes: if you don't even know what the previous question I asked about is then you have no merit in making statements on compression pq capabilities without following it with so ring like AFAIK.
DotJun is offline  
post #5774 of 6481 Old 04-30-2014, 09:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
olyteddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by DotJun 
you should take a look at some re-compressed material from people that know what they're doing before making bold statements like "you can tell it is re compressed on anything but the smallest mobile screens".
I don't see where I said anything of the sort. I merely pointed out that a lossy compression will take something away. I agree you can create a reasonable facsimile of a Blu-Ray using a more efficient codec such as H.265 or H.264 BUT you still get a replica and NOT a copy.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(Just as big an idea thief as)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
olyteddy is online now  
post #5775 of 6481 Old 04-30-2014, 10:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
DotJun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 916
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by olyteddy View Post

I don't see where I said anything of the sort. I merely pointed out that a lossy compression will take something away. I agree you can create a reasonable facsimile of a Blu-Ray using a more efficient codec such as H.265 or H.264 BUT you still get a replica and NOT a copy.
Follow me real fast on this, if I show you a frame that is 50 bits large but it can look exactly the same at 10 bits then the frame would look identical whether it is 10 or 50 bits. The thing that a lot of people don't remember is that a bit starved frame will look like crap but a bit bloated frame won't look any better.
DotJun is offline  
post #5776 of 6481 Old 05-01-2014, 12:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ScottJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 1,414
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by DotJun View Post

Follow me real fast on this, if I show you a frame that is 50 bits large but it can look exactly the same at 10 bits then the frame would look identical whether it is 10 or 50 bits. The thing that a lot of people don't remember is that a bit starved frame will look like crap but a bit bloated frame won't look any better.

I'm sure lots of Blu-ray Discs have bloated frames. It can even be beneficial to the studio since some viewers (even some professional reviewers!) will turn on the bit rate meter and use that to judge the picture quality. So they crank up the bitrate to max, even it does nothing for PQ, since (until you run out of space on the disc) it costs the studio nothing. It probably also takes less of the compressionist's time since the quality control would be easier.

(Note, I don't recompress, simply because that's not where I choose to spend my time. Lots of other HT improvements to make before I worry about that one.)
ScottJ is offline  
post #5777 of 6481 Old 05-01-2014, 05:57 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,028
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottJ View Post

(Note, I don't recompress, simply because that's not where I choose to spend my time.)

Bingo!

Others may choose differently. But a different choice does not mean other choices are wrong. Gosh this is getting tiresome ....

Jeff


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- it's never done!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
pepar is offline  
post #5778 of 6481 Old 05-01-2014, 06:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kriktsemaj99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 5,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 129 Post(s)
Liked: 154
Is anyone playing 3D MKVs (MVC Blu-ray rips) with an Oppo BDP-103D (or other Oppo BD player)?

2D MKVs are working well (full resolution video and HD audio) but my attempts at 3D just play in 2D. I've tried making them directly with MakeMKV, or in multiple steps with DVDFab/eac3to/mkvmerge (which works well for 2D).

What I didn't yet try is playing them from local storage on the Oppo, instead of from a DLNA server or SMB share. Maybe they are not supported in all cases?

Any tips for 3D MKVs that work with the Oppo would be appreciated.
kriktsemaj99 is online now  
post #5779 of 6481 Old 05-01-2014, 07:11 AM
Advanced Member
 
DotJun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 916
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Bingo!

Others may choose differently. But a different choice does not mean other choices are wrong. Gosh this is getting tiresome ....

Jeff
I also agree with these statements but what I find odd is how whenever compression is brought up you see lots of posts against it but you normally don't see the guys who compress their vids making fun of those that don't. Ok I don't mean making fun of. I'm just tired and want to go home from work already 😊
DotJun is offline  
post #5780 of 6481 Old 05-01-2014, 07:15 AM
Advanced Member
 
DotJun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 916
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottJ View Post

I'm sure lots of Blu-ray Discs have bloated frames. It can even be beneficial to the studio since some viewers (even some professional reviewers!) will turn on the bit rate meter and use that to judge the picture quality. So they crank up the bitrate to max, even it does nothing for PQ, since (until you run out of space on the disc) it costs the studio nothing. It probably also takes less of the compressionist's time since the quality control would be easier.

(Note, I don't recompress, simply because that's not where I choose to spend my time. Lots of other HT improvements to make before I worry about that one.)
I try and get this across to people all the time but for some reason most people think that whoever first compresses to bluray are doing the best possible job for pq as possible. Sorry, but that happens far less than the other way around. If it were true then you wouldn't end up with a huge disparity in file sizes.

Take for example band of brothers (2 episodes per disc) vs Big Bang theory (12 episodes per disc). One engineer obviously went for least overhead while the other figured he has 50 gigs to work with so why bother.
DotJun is offline  
post #5781 of 6481 Old 05-01-2014, 07:55 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 264 Post(s)
Liked: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Bingo!

Others may choose differently. But a different choice does not mean other choices are wrong. Gosh this is getting tiresome ....

It seems we go round on this topic every couple months. You are jumping the gun here -- usually it takes a while longer before the conclusion of it being personal preference is advanced. I think I burnt out on this topic the last time.

@dotjun -- It's almost unfair for people to argue this with you. From previous rounds it is clear that your level of re-coding expertise and the tools you have at your disposal far exceed the average Handbrake user who will use it as a black box -- plug his files into the interface and pick profile someone on a forum recommends -- with very little understanding of what is going on inside or how the settings impact the result.
Quote:
but you normally don't see the guys who compress their vids making fun of those that don't.
Oh yes, you do see quite a bit of that and usually it is one of those types of comments that ignites the fuse.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #5782 of 6481 Old 05-01-2014, 08:01 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,028
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

It seems we go round on this topic every couple months. You are jumping the gun here -- usually it takes a while longer before the conclusion of it being personal preference is advanced. I think I burnt out on this topic the last time.

@dotjun -- It's almost unfair for people to argue this with you. From previous rounds it is clear that your level of re-coding expertise and the tools you have at your disposal far exceed the average Handbrake user who will use it as a black box -- plug his files into the interface and pick profile someone on a forum recommends -- with very little understanding of what is going on inside or how the settings impact the result.
Oh yes, you do see quite a bit of that and usually it is one of those types of comments that ignites the fuse.

I'll give DotJun the compliment of saying that he has science on his side. Some "non-compressors" (and at least one recent re-encoder) have an almost religious fervor about them. The rest of us who don't re-encode are more likely in the camp of "I know it can be done, but I don't want/need to spend the time."

Re jumping the gun, my fuse is getting shorter. wink.gif

Jeff


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- it's never done!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
pepar is offline  
post #5783 of 6481 Old 05-01-2014, 08:50 AM
Advanced Member
 
mrfattbill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post


Re jumping the gun, my fuse is getting shorter. wink.gif

Jeff

Like having kids....the fuse gets shorter everyday.



Bill
mrfattbill is offline  
post #5784 of 6481 Old 05-02-2014, 08:01 PM
Member
 
hogger129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The Dark Side Of The Moon
Posts: 194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadsdsmith View Post

No matter what format the original source is, the file will be degraded if it is compressed again, regardless of how great the codec used is. Its not like true hd/dts ma audio where all the information is still there.....its gone. With that said, H.265 looks promising with regards to the efficiency in which it compresses to the point where it can take a file and compress it much better than previous methods at the same level of compression. The problem, as has been stated, is the ability to replay it on playback devices. At this point, compressing something with H.265 means it can only be played back on computer software with new codec support or whatever other media player comes out to support it, but no existing players (wdtv,bd players, roku etc) have that functionality, so you would be limiting it usefulness. I don't think H.265 will be that prevalent until we seem more 4k stuff, ie. 4k/uhd blu ray. I don't even bother with compressing because, as has been mentioned, storage is relatively cheap and I figure my next major tv purchase will be some sort of uhd tv (hopefully oled) and if I will be upscaling to that tv, I want to have as much info there for the scaler to use, even if the difference is not very noticeable now.

...and with Handbrake using the x265 encoder on 'slow' quality, it takes my i5 desktop ~12-13 hrs to encode a 2 1/2 hr movie.
hogger129 is offline  
post #5785 of 6481 Old 05-02-2014, 08:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bigbarney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,594
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by DotJun View Post

I try and get this across to people all the time but for some reason most people think that whoever first compresses to bluray are doing the best possible job for pq as possible. Sorry, but that happens far less than the other way around. If it were true then you wouldn't end up with a huge disparity in file sizes.

Take for example band of brothers (2 episodes per disc) vs Big Bang theory (12 episodes per disc). One engineer obviously went for least overhead while the other figured he has 50 gigs to work with so why bother.
It depends on the encoding method chosen (and there are quite a few. Some of the more common ones are CBR and VBR

CBR (Constant bit rate) will deliver the same preset bit rate to each frame regardless of whether or not it's needed. VBR (variable bit rate) on the other hand analyzes each frame and decides how many bits are required given the action involved and the amount of light depicted in each frame. Slower darker frames require less bits than brighter ones with fast action involved so a VBR encoding will overall be more efficient.... but then it takes more time to encode. But in understanding this, one can begin to understand why some movies are larger in size. Generally speaking action movies require a lot more bits to be as clear as a non action movies and non action movies can deliver the same kind of clarity with fewer bits.

That being said, I don't think the argument has much to do with the quality in a blu ray disc (and I agree... the quality level can vary greatly from disc to disc), but rather regardless of the quality presented.... it's the best we have to work with.

And yes... re-compressing DOES remove quality, and not just the cut in bitrate either, but the error involved with the encoder itself (lots of round off errors involved even with the best of encoders). I like to keep a pic of old buster around to prove the point (I do a lot of video editing and get into this conversation a lot)



Old buster after being re encoded 10 times.Now this is re encoded 10 times with the same bit rate yet the colors and tinting has definitely changed. Now the clarity isn't that bad, at least not so bad after being uncompressed/re-compressed 10 times, but the staggering part is how the color/tint has changed. This is pure encoder error in working with a compressed (lossy) codec. In the video editing world we tend to try and work with intermediate formats/codecs as much as possible while editing to try and avoid as many losses as one can, but at the end of the day... if you re-encode you will lose out on something somewhere.
olyteddy and StratmanX like this.
bigbarney is offline  
post #5786 of 6481 Old 05-02-2014, 09:52 PM
Advanced Member
 
techmattr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 613
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 182
^Did he just explain constant and variable bitrate to DotJun? biggrin.gif


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
techmattr is offline  
post #5787 of 6481 Old 05-03-2014, 04:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bigbarney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,594
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by techmattr View Post

^Did he just explain constant and variable bitrate to DotJun? biggrin.gif
Actually, No. I assume most already know what cbr/vbr is. If you do video encoding then you must have already run across the idea of cbr/vbr encoding methods long ago. I'm simply pointing out that often it's an overlooked concept which answers why some movies can get away with fewer bits than others. People tend to tunnel vision on bit rate and use it for a yard stick on quality and while it's true that bit rate can affect quality, it's just part of the picture.
bigbarney is offline  
post #5788 of 6481 Old 05-06-2014, 07:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
DotJun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 916
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbarney View Post

It depends on the encoding method chosen (and there are quite a few. Some of the more common ones are CBR and VBR

CBR (Constant bit rate) will deliver the same preset bit rate to each frame regardless of whether or not it's needed. VBR (variable bit rate) on the other hand analyzes each frame and decides how many bits are required given the action involved and the amount of light depicted in each frame. Slower darker frames require less bits than brighter ones with fast action involved so a VBR encoding will overall be more efficient.... but then it takes more time to encode. But in understanding this, one can begin to understand why some movies are larger in size. Generally speaking action movies require a lot more bits to be as clear as a non action movies and non action movies can deliver the same kind of clarity with fewer bits.

That being said, I don't think the argument has much to do with the quality in a blu ray disc (and I agree... the quality level can vary greatly from disc to disc), but rather regardless of the quality presented.... it's the best we have to work with.

And yes... re-compressing DOES remove quality, and not just the cut in bitrate either, but the error involved with the encoder itself (lots of round off errors involved even with the best of encoders). I like to keep a pic of old buster around to prove the point (I do a lot of video editing and get into this conversation a lot)



Old buster after being re encoded 10 times.Now this is re encoded 10 times with the same bit rate yet the colors and tinting has definitely changed. Now the clarity isn't that bad, at least not so bad after being uncompressed/re-compressed 10 times, but the staggering part is how the color/tint has changed. This is pure encoder error in working with a compressed (lossy) codec. In the video editing world we tend to try and work with intermediate formats/codecs as much as possible while editing to try and avoid as many losses as one can, but at the end of the day... if you re-encode you will lose out on something somewhere.
These are the kind of samples I see all the time. People against x topic show extremes for their samples. No one is going to re-encode a file 10x over.

I don't know what encoder you are using but my free version of x.264 has not, after hundreds of encodes and dozens of revision changes, ever changed the color of the source file unless I choose for it to do so. One of the most powerful tools at an encoders disposal is being able to fix problems from bad transfers to disc. People that watch anime will know what I speak of as it is far more prevalent there.

Also, I've found it opposite of what you stated. Dark and/or fast scenes take less bits and opposite is true for slow/bright scenes. A good encoder also doesn't apply amount of bits to use based on just the frame in question, but frames before and after the frame in question also which is what is known as reference frames.

Even vbr will add more or less bits depending on how tight of a setting you give to vbr. Vbr is not a universal setting. You still have to set how much or how little to compress by which again will determine the quality of your end product. I prefer crf myself.

@Kelson, I don't have special tools. I use free tools available to everyone. I use megui with whatever tools come with it. The only non-free tools I use is anydvdhd and dgindexnv, of which the latter isn't "needed".
DotJun is offline  
post #5789 of 6481 Old 05-07-2014, 04:04 AM
Advanced Member
 
Chere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 841
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Hi everyone. May I interrupt this heated debate amongst the pros so they can help out a newbie in his quest to learn about ripping BDs/ 3D BDs.

My setup is pretty simple : Panasonic 65VT60 and an Oppo 103D with a Toshiba 5TB External Hardrive connected to it.

My requirements: Easy. I want to maintain the complete video and audio quality (including lossless audio and subtitles) without losing the PQ or Audio of the original BD and rip it to my external hard drive. I don't care about chapters although being able to fast forward/ remind is a must. I also don't care about extras or bonus features. I don't mind the initial piracy warnings but if I can bypass them as well that will be a bonus wink.gif 3D BDs need to be in a side to side or top to bottom format as I just learned that my Oppo wouldn't recognize them unless otherwise.

I will need to purchase a USB 3.0 BD reader and burner (my laptop can't read/ write BDs) and from what I've been reading- LG seems to be the recommended brand. If so which model should I look at?

And now the most important thing: choosing the software. I'm not very software savvy so I need something simple and easy that will let me choose the above parameters in very easy steps. I'm not sure what ISOs and some of the others mentioned here are so I'm hoping that if I can output everything to MKV- I can get away without learning about them biggrin.gif

On the giveaway of the day website last week they had the Leawo Blu Ray to MKV Converter which I downloaded but am not sure if it'll satisfy all my requirements.

Any advice and guidance provided is truly appreciated smile.gif


Edit: Yikes! I just realized that I still need a proper ripper as the Leawo above will only convert already ripped BDs and not rip and convert at the same time. Or am I wrong?
Chere is offline  
post #5790 of 6481 Old 05-07-2014, 04:19 AM
One-Man Content Creator
 
wmcclain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 17,268
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 383 Post(s)
Liked: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chere View Post

Hi everyone. May I interrupt this heated debate amongst the pros so they can help out a newbie in his quest to learn about ripping BDs/ 3D BDs.

My setup is pretty simple : Panasonic 65VT60 and an Oppo 103D with a Toshiba 5TB External Hardrive connected to it.

Try MakeMKV. No compression, same quality as the original. It has it's own decryption so you don't need AnyDVD or DVDFab.

I've never done 3D but I recall that MakeMKV will produce side-by-side. Search the MakeMKV forums for 3D if you don't get specific help on that here.

-Bill


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Unofficial OPPO FAQS:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

 

wmcclain is online now  
Reply Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming

Tags
Dune Hd Smart B1 1080p Media Player
Gear in this thread - 1080p by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off