Ripping Blu-Rays II - Page 211 - AVS Forum
First ... 209  210  211 212  213  ... Last
Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming > Ripping Blu-Rays II
techmattr's Avatar techmattr 05:53 PM 08-20-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhughy2010 View Post
I've been having a miserable time with Handbrake nightly build (using QSV). Has anyone else given up trying to get a film encoded via QSV? I really am skeptical of the quality as well.

Anyhow, reverted back to a stable build and am using x264 (nice and slow).
Quality/Size ratio for QSV is terrible. With the latest Intel drivers and a Haswell you can get decent results but you have to use average bitrate instead of constant quality. If you use constant quality and set the quality to what you normally would the file will be at least double in size. Definitely larger than the source. Plus you'll have bitrate spikes. Whenever I tried constant quality I've always had it spike to at least 60Mbps. Anything with a lot of fast movement it typically gets up around 5~6Gbps and it obviously becomes unplayable when you hit those spikes. The last one I tried was an episode of Under the Dome and the source was about 5GB, constant quality was set to 20, 1080p and I ended up with a 96GB file. Looked terrible compared to the source. I re-ran it with standard x264 with the same settings and I get a 2GB file and the quality not noticeably different from the source. I'll sometimes use QSV for shows like Whose Line is it Anyway where I don't care about the quality. I just want to shrink it down a bit and convert from mpeg2/interlaced to AVC/progressive. Quality is definitely terrible though. QSV is no where near ready for prime time Blu-ray re-encoding. Unless you want all your rips to look like Yiffy encodes. But yeah.... try QSV with average bitrate and see if you get better results.

DotJun's Avatar DotJun 12:04 AM 08-21-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by techmattr View Post
Quality/Size ratio for QSV is terrible. With the latest Intel drivers and a Haswell you can get decent results but you have to use average bitrate instead of constant quality. If you use constant quality and set the quality to what you normally would the file will be at least double in size. Definitely larger than the source. Plus you'll have bitrate spikes. Whenever I tried constant quality I've always had it spike to at least 60Mbps. Anything with a lot of fast movement it typically gets up around 5~6Gbps and it obviously becomes unplayable when you hit those spikes. The last one I tried was an episode of Under the Dome and the source was about 5GB, constant quality was set to 20, 1080p and I ended up with a 96GB file. Looked terrible compared to the source. I re-ran it with standard x264 with the same settings and I get a 2GB file and the quality not noticeably different from the source. I'll sometimes use QSV for shows like Whose Line is it Anyway where I don't care about the quality. I just want to shrink it down a bit and convert from mpeg2/interlaced to AVC/progressive. Quality is definitely terrible though. QSV is no where near ready for prime time Blu-ray re-encoding. Unless you want all your rips to look like Yiffy encodes. But yeah.... try QSV with average bitrate and see if you get better results.

Would tweaking vbv buffer/bitrate (rate control) help this situation out?

Edit: help out the bitrate spikes I mean.
mike_carton's Avatar mike_carton 12:18 PM 08-21-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhughy2010 View Post
I've been having a miserable time with Handbrake nightly build (using QSV). Has anyone else given up trying to get a film encoded via QSV? I really am skeptical of the quality as well.

Anyhow, reverted back to a stable build and am using x264 (nice and slow).
I tried Handbrake Main profile with Constant Quality at 20 on a 1080p file (AVC in MP4 with AAC) and produced H.265 in MP4 with audio copied through. The 5:30 min file took 8+ hours, wasn't that great and nearly doubled in size.

Yesterday I tried MediaCoder (apparently free) with same file. When I chose for the file to be processed in 4 parallel segments, it took ~25 min and reduced file size by 45%. No obvious degradation.

Need to try more samples (with both tools).
jhughy2010's Avatar jhughy2010 02:03 PM 08-21-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike_carton View Post
I tried Handbrake Main profile with Constant Quality at 20 on a 1080p file (AVC in MP4 with AAC) and produced H.265 in MP4 with audio copied through. The 5:30 min file took 8+ hours, wasn't that great and nearly doubled in size.

Yesterday I tried MediaEncoder (apparently free) with same file. When I chose for the file to be processed in 4 parallel segments, it took ~25 min and reduced file size by 45%. No obvious degradation.

Need to try more samples (with both tools).
That sounds promising. I'd like to stick with handbrake because I'm used to it... I like what I have seen so far while compressing a few kid shows to H.265 but they took FOREVER (like 10+ hours).

I used the default settings: profile is none, tune is none, preset is set to veryfast, constant quality to 20... also, presets is "high profile" (on right side of screen).

What are some of the differences with "Tune" and "H.265 Profile"?
jhughy2010's Avatar jhughy2010 02:23 PM 08-21-2014
I did a quick 60 second sample of "The Jungle Book" (about half way through the film):

x264 - 30 MB

QSV H.264 - 71.8 MB

H.265 - Preset VeryFast - 24.6 MB, Preset Slow - 21.6 MB

No noticeable difference in PQ or overall quality. I think out of the three x264 is still the top pick due to compatibility at this point. Those results were all utilizing default (except high profile) in the video settings.
elario's Avatar elario 02:31 PM 08-21-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhughy2010 View Post
That sounds promising. I'd like to stick with handbrake because I'm used to it... I like what I have seen so far while compressing a few kid shows to H.265 but they took FOREVER (like 10+ hours).

I used the default settings: profile is none, tune is none, preset is set to veryfast, constant quality to 20... also, presets is "high profile" (on right side of screen).

What are some of the differences with "Tune" and "H.265 Profile"?
Tune PSNR or SSIM tune the encoder to produce an output that looks worse but performs better according to these metrics. It exists so you can fairly compare the encoder with other encoders that are already optimized for these metrics. It shouldn't be used otherwise.

Profiles are basically defined levels of feature-set complexity. Higher profiles add in more stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Ef...oding#Profiles

You shouldn't stray far from the medium preset, it's called medium for a reason. The faster presets provide worse compression, which goes against what you are trying to achieve with HEVC.
mike_carton's Avatar mike_carton 06:10 PM 08-21-2014
I'm doing this out of curiosity about the progress of H.265 encoders. Which is why I'm avoiding animated clips as I suspect they're less challenging for encoders. If you're planning on actually using this, I suspect leaving the original file untouched is the best option followed by transcoding to H.264.

The file I mentioned above I coverted to H.265 again (same bitrate and format as above), this time using VLC; it didn't offer a choice of profiles. Took 28 minutes and produced a 35% smaller file. Even VLC itself won't play the video probably because the FourCC is hvc1 (Handbrake and MediaCoder are using hev1)

Next up: Try uncompressed 1080p AVI clip of 1 minute or so, if I can find such a thing on the web.
jhughy2010's Avatar jhughy2010 06:39 PM 08-21-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike_carton View Post
I'm doing this out of curiosity about the progress of H.265 encoders. Which is why I'm avoiding animated clips as I suspect they're less challenging for encoders. If you're planning on actually using this, I suspect leaving the original file untouched is the best option followed by transcoding to H.264.

The file I mentioned above I coverted to H.265 again (same bitrate and format as above), this time using VLC; it didn't offer a choice of profiles. Took 28 minutes and produced a 35% smaller file. Even VLC itself won't play the video probably because the FourCC is hvc1 (Handbrake and MediaEncoder are using hev1)

Next up: Try uncompressed 1080p AVI clip of 1 minute or so, if I can find such a thing on the web.
Nice! Keep experimenting and report back.
mike_carton's Avatar mike_carton 05:13 PM 08-22-2014
The tool I've been trying out is MediaCoder, not MediaEncoder. Will edit the previous posts to reflect that.
DotJun's Avatar DotJun 09:07 PM 08-23-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike_carton View Post
I tried Handbrake Main profile with Constant Quality at 20 on a 1080p file (AVC in MP4 with AAC) and produced H.265 in MP4 with audio copied through. The 5:30 min file took 8+ hours, wasn't that great and nearly doubled in size.

Yesterday I tried MediaCoder (apparently free) with same file. When I chose for the file to be processed in 4 parallel segments, it took ~25 min and reduced file size by 45%. No obvious degradation.

Need to try more samples (with both tools).

8 hours? Either it's nowhere near ready for mainstream or our hardware hasn't caught up yet. I remember the same thing happening when x264 came out.

Please tune to a metric for comparison as it makes things so much simpler.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elario View Post
Tune PSNR or SSIM tune the encoder to produce an output that looks worse but performs better according to these metrics. It exists so you can fairly compare the encoder with other encoders that are already optimized for these metrics. It shouldn't be used otherwise.

Profiles are basically defined levels of feature-set complexity. Higher profiles add in more stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Ef...oding#Profiles

You shouldn't stray far from the medium preset, it's called medium for a reason. The faster presets provide worse compression, which goes against what you are trying to achieve with HEVC.

Yep, I think I asked many posts ago to tune to either metric for ease of comparison. Really should also preset to medium. Actually, x264 defaults to medium so you shouldn't even have to specify a preset.

One more thing, maybe should set an avc level (though my vote goes for unrestricted) because I don't know how handbrake sets other parameters when the testers are using different levels.
hogger129's Avatar hogger129 05:23 AM 08-24-2014
Anyone here prefer 720p rips over 1080p rips? To my eyes, 720p looks very good, and the other benefit is that it's a much smaller file size than a 1080p rip. I'm only watching on a 42" TV from ~6ft away, so I guess 1080p really is not beneficial to me anyway. I'm pretty sure 720p is the native resolution of my TV also.
pepar's Avatar pepar 10:59 AM 08-24-2014
^^^

If true, then your last sentence is probably the limiting factor in you seeing a dif between 720p and 1080p on your display.
jhughy2010's Avatar jhughy2010 10:21 PM 08-24-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by DotJun View Post
Yep, I think I asked many posts ago to tune to either metric for ease of comparison. Really should also preset to medium. Actually, x264 defaults to medium so you shouldn't even have to specify a preset. One more thing, maybe should set an avc level (though my vote goes for unrestricted) because I don't know how handbrake sets other parameters when the testers are using different levels.
I don't see an AVC level setting in Handbrake (I just downloaded latest version.... not the nightly build though). Also, what would be the difference between medium and slow for preset?
funhouse69's Avatar funhouse69 12:08 AM 08-25-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by hogger129 View Post
Anyone here prefer 720p rips over 1080p rips? To my eyes, 720p looks very good, and the other benefit is that it's a much smaller file size than a 1080p rip. I'm only watching on a 42" TV from ~6ft away, so I guess 1080p really is not beneficial to me anyway. I'm pretty sure 720p is the native resolution of my TV also.
I rip my Blu-Rays depending on the movie itself, something that is very visually appealing I rip full resolution and others I will down-res them to 720p using DVD Fab which does a really nice job. I have a 55" Sharp and sure there is a difference but I honestly don't think the average person would notice and for the storage space savings I am ok with it.

So I would say that I rip maybe 1 out of 10 movies full 1080p which is the native resolution of my TV.

Keep in mind that a very large percentage of HD Channels are still only 720p and I think that most of them look pretty good on FIOS.

One could also argue that you have to think of the future, more than likely you will get a larger TV at which time you might notice the difference more / wish you ripped them at 1080p? Since we all have our originals discs you can always go back and re-rip them =)
DotJun's Avatar DotJun 01:37 AM 08-25-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhughy2010 View Post
I don't see an AVC level setting in Handbrake (I just downloaded latest version.... not the nightly build though). Also, what would be the difference between medium and slow for preset?

You can look up all the options here: http://mewiki.project357.com/wiki/X264_Settings

Just stick to medium preset with ssim or psnr tune then post the results. We aren't trying to optimize settings, just comparing between the different encoders on equal footing. [emoji4] thank you for all your time btw.

Edit: if you find that encoding is really interesting, might I also suggest checking out avisynth and megui as your encoder GUI over handbrake? I'm biased towards megui cause handbrake gave me a headache when I tried using it years ago [emoji1]
pepar's Avatar pepar 01:18 PM 08-25-2014
What is the best way to extract the audio from a Blu-ray Audio? Convert to what format? With what tool?
wmcclain's Avatar wmcclain 01:34 PM 08-25-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post
What is the best way to extract the audio from a Blu-ray Audio? Convert to what format? With what tool?
What's the purpose? Do you need to retain the original quality?

DVDFab has audio extraction and conversion under the Blu-ray Ripper module. I've used it to convert commentary tracks to mp3 for offline listening.

I'm trying to get away from DVDFab. I believe ffmpeg will do it, but I haven't set up scripts yet. I'd be starting from an MKV file created with MakeMKV.

-Bill
dbone1026's Avatar dbone1026 01:40 PM 08-25-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcclain View Post
What's the purpose? Do you need to retain the original quality?

DVDFab has audio extraction and conversion under the Blu-ray Ripper module. I've used it to convert commentary tracks to mp3 for offline listening.

I'm trying to get away from DVDFab. I believe ffmpeg will do it, but I haven't set up scripts yet. I'd be starting from an MKV file created with MakeMKV.

-Bill
You can also extract the audio using ClownBD
thestewman's Avatar thestewman 02:06 PM 08-25-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcclain View Post
What's the purpose? Do you need to retain the original quality?

I'm trying to get away from DVDFab. I believe ffmpeg will do it, but I haven't set up scripts yet. I'd be starting from an MKV file created with MakeMKV.

-Bill
The reason ?
pepar's Avatar pepar 02:22 PM 08-25-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcclain View Post
What's the purpose? Do you need to retain the original quality?
Yes, definitely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dbone1026 View Post
You can also extract the audio using ClownBD
Any special settings, or just run it through the paces as with a regular Blu-ray?

Thanks, guys!
wmcclain's Avatar wmcclain 02:27 PM 08-25-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by thestewman View Post
The reason ?
For what? Getting away from DVDFab? Recent developments in their business make the product less appealing than before.

-Bill
dbone1026's Avatar dbone1026 02:44 PM 08-25-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post
Yes, definitely.



Any special settings, or just run it through the paces as with a regular Blu-ray?

Thanks, guys!
No special settings. You can just run it like you would a blu ray and de select and of the video stuff so you only get the audio tracks
DotJun's Avatar DotJun 07:41 PM 08-25-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post
What is the best way to extract the audio from a Blu-ray Audio? Convert to what format? With what tool?

Eac3to is easy and will allow you to convert to many other formats.
pepar's Avatar pepar 08:10 AM 08-26-2014
^^^

Thanks. How does DTS-HD MA or TrueHD convert to FLAC ... losslessly? I must confess that I know jack about cinema formats other than to simply let my pre/pro decode them. BD Audio streamed from a file is new territory..

But maybe I should keep it as an ISO/folder structure and stream it via my Popcorn?

Jeff

Edit: quick googling results in forum posts about eac3to not incorporating the lossless part of DTS/Dolby formats .. only the cores. Still googling ...
jhughy2010's Avatar jhughy2010 08:13 AM 08-26-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by DotJun View Post
You can look up all the options here: http://mewiki.project357.com/wiki/X264_Settings

Just stick to medium preset with ssim or psnr tune then post the results. We aren't trying to optimize settings, just comparing between the different encoders on equal footing. [emoji4] thank you for all your time btw.

Edit: if you find that encoding is really interesting, might I also suggest checking out avisynth and megui as your encoder GUI over handbrake? I'm biased towards megui cause handbrake gave me a headache when I tried using it years ago [emoji1]
I've kinda given up on H.265 it takes so long to even do a five minute clip. ATM I am encoding a ton of my collection to x264 (not QSV) and putting in on an external for travel. I have been bouncing back and forth with slow and medium. Everything else pretty much default except audio is to stereo. Would slow make for a smaller file size?
Brian Hampton's Avatar Brian Hampton 11:25 AM 08-26-2014
If I'm ripping Blus that I own and I own 1500 of them....

Should I use Raid 5 ... or just let the discs themselves serve as a backup and not use any type of Raid?

... One advantage if I decide not to do the raid backup notion is I can add the drives as I can afford them rather than saving up for 4 drives at a time type thing. Another advantage is 20% more storage capacity.

The major dis-advantage is the possibility of having to re-do 100+ movies... and also the mess of trying to salvage data from a bad drive .. I guess that's not really a big deal though is it... maybe when the drive if found to be faulty I can save 80% or more of the data ....

=Brian
smitbret's Avatar smitbret 12:59 PM 08-26-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhughy2010 View Post
I've kinda given up on H.265 it takes so long to even do a five minute clip. ATM I am encoding a ton of my collection to x264 (not QSV) and putting in on an external for travel. I have been bouncing back and forth with slow and medium. Everything else pretty much default except audio is to stereo. Would slow make for a smaller file size?
Thank goodness..... since .h265 really has nothing to do with Ripping Blu-Rays anyway.
smitbret's Avatar smitbret 01:03 PM 08-26-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post
If I'm ripping Blus that I own and I own 1500 of them....

Should I use Raid 5 ... or just let the discs themselves serve as a backup and not use any type of Raid?

... One advantage if I decide not to do the raid backup notion is I can add the drives as I can afford them rather than saving up for 4 drives at a time type thing. Another advantage is 20% more storage capacity.

The major dis-advantage is the possibility of having to re-do 100+ movies... and also the mess of trying to salvage data from a bad drive .. I guess that's not really a big deal though is it... maybe when the drive if found to be faulty I can save 80% or more of the data ....

=Brian
This was my quandry, too. I really hate the idea that I will need to re rip all of the DVDs and BRs if something crashed. Not to mention the fact, that I have compressed most of them over the last few years. I tend to cut 1080p down to about 8-12GB and 720p to about 6GB since I really don't see a difference at these sizes unless I know to look. I don't back them up since I figure the original discs are the backup. But I figure it's EASILY worth the extra $100 to know that I probably will never have to re rip/re encode them. It takes about 30-45 minutes to rip a BR and depending on the quality it can take 2 hours to 18 hours for me to do an encode. It only takes a couple dozen BRs before the $100 for a HDD and $60 for my FlexRAID software license looks like a great investment.

As far as expanding the array goes, this is one reason I went with FlexRAID instead of a Hardware RAID or ZFS RAID solution. It allows me to add new HDDs without breaking up the array and losing data. I just throw a new one in every year that falls into the $/GB sweet spot (right now that is 3TB) and my array grows.
pepar's Avatar pepar 01:05 PM 08-26-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitbret View Post
Thank goodness..... since .h265 really has nothing to do with Ripping Blu-Rays anyway.
Re-encoding has nothing to do with Ripping Blu-rays," period. I would be in favor of a thread dedicated to "re-encoding" ...

My $.02.

Jeff
dbone1026's Avatar dbone1026 02:36 PM 08-26-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post
If I'm ripping Blus that I own and I own 1500 of them....

Should I use Raid 5 ... or just let the discs themselves serve as a backup and not use any type of Raid?

... One advantage if I decide not to do the raid backup notion is I can add the drives as I can afford them rather than saving up for 4 drives at a time type thing. Another advantage is 20% more storage capacity.

The major dis-advantage is the possibility of having to re-do 100+ movies... and also the mess of trying to salvage data from a bad drive .. I guess that's not really a big deal though is it... maybe when the drive if found to be faulty I can save 80% or more of the data ....

=Brian
I just do JBOD and use Stablebit drivepool to make everything appear as one large pooled drive. You can enable their redundancy feature which essentially gives you software RAID 1, but the benefit being you don't have to mess around with RAID and can add any types of drives you want . Obviously not the most efficient use of space but I am ok with
Tags: Dune Hd Smart B1 1080p Media Player
First ... 209  210  211 212  213  ... Last

Up
Mobile  Desktop