or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ripping Blu-Rays II - Page 176

post #5251 of 5714

Does anyone know if there is a way to Rip / Copy a Blu-Ray with and without compression at the same time where the end result would be two different files one compressed and the other one full quality? I know it can be done after the fact but that seems to be time consuming and requires an extra step.

 

Just curious if anyone does that or knows of a way it can be done.

post #5252 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by funhouse69 View Post

Does anyone know if there is a way to Rip / Copy a Blu-Ray with and without compression at the same time where the end result would be two different files one compressed and the other one full quality? I know it can be done after the fact but that seems to be time consuming and requires an extra step.

Just curious if anyone does that or knows of a way it can be done.
Run 2 separate programs at once? That would probably actually slow things down because you'd have to access the BluRay form 2 separate locations at the same time. Your BD drive access time is the slowest part of the process. Why not write a script or batch file to run your compression program on the output of your ripping program?
post #5253 of 5714
Especially since encoding from an optical drive with compression puts too much strain on it.
post #5254 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by techflaws View Post

Especially since encoding from an optical drive with compression puts too much strain on it.
o_O

Perhaps you are talking about a slow CPU-bound process that results in the disc spinning up and stopping again repeatedly?
post #5255 of 5714
Rip the entire BD to an SSD and have one add'l SSD for every simultaneous operation you want to perform ... after the rip is complete.

I forget, why is this being discussed?

Jeff
post #5256 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by funhouse69 View Post

Does anyone know if there is a way to Rip / Copy a Blu-Ray with and without compression at the same time where the end result would be two different files one compressed and the other one full quality? I know it can be done after the fact but that seems to be time consuming and requires an extra step.

Just curious if anyone does that or knows of a way it can be done.

There are plenty of ways it can be done. None of them are good. As others have already mentioned you're bottle-necked somewhere in the process at all times. If you add a second process to a workflow that is already bottle-necked both of those processes are going to take longer than they would being run individually. However you may save some time overall. Your easiest workflow would be to create a script that watches a directory for mkv files and runs any new mkv files through handbrake. That way all you have to do is run MakeMKV and create your lossless copy and the script would take that copy, move it to a temp location and run handbrake against it.
post #5257 of 5714
Need help and guidance,

I just finished ripping my blu ray collection with makemkv. I was able to rip all except 2 discs, Crash and Battle of Smithsonian II. For those two discs I have tried aimersoft BR edition and no luck either. Anyone have any luck or recommendations?

Also why do some rip a BR then use Handbrake? What is the benefit?

Thanx newb at this.
post #5258 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by kawie01 View Post

Need help and guidance,

I just finished ripping my blu ray collection with makemkv. I was able to rip all except 2 discs, Crash and Battle of Smithsonian II. For those two discs I have tried aimersoft BR edition and no luck either. Anyone have any luck or recommendations?

Also why do some rip a BR then use Handbrake? What is the benefit?

Thanx newb at this.

AnyDVD HD has a trial version. You could try that. I don't have either of those movies on BD so I can't directly help.

As for Handbrake there are two reasons to use it... one is to save space by compressing the movies and the other is for format compatibility for things like mobile devices.
post #5259 of 5714
Wont compression ruin the HD? Thus negating the purpose of large file conversion?
post #5260 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by kawie01 View Post

Wont compression ruin the HD? Thus negating the purpose of large file conversion?

No, not necessarily. It depends on many factors. The degree and method of compression, the viewing angle, and the level of discrimination by the viewer.

-Bill
post #5261 of 5714
Bill,

Which settings, methods, programs would you recommend? Right now, I have movies between 15-25 gb. I wouldn't mind decreasing file size but I dont want to sacrifice quality. Looking to eventually getting a popcorn hour or Dune?

Thanks again for your help
post #5262 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by kawie01 View Post

Wont compression ruin the HD? Thus negating the purpose of large file conversion?
Yes you will notice it on a large enough display. But not on your iPad.
post #5263 of 5714
Wife may watch on IPAD, I on my projector. So should I leave as is and just keep adding hard drives?
post #5264 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcclain View Post

No, not necessarily. It depends on many factors. The degree and method of compression, the viewing angle, and the level of discrimination by the viewer.

-Bill

To expand on this....... the x264 encoder uses a constant quality value that ranges from 0 (highest quality; no compression) to 51 (lowest quality). It also uses some other filters to improve quality that can be tweaked as well as the amount of time the encoder is allowed to work on each frame. A 2 hour movie can take anywhere from 10 minutes to 24+ hours to re-encode depending on the settings used.

https://trac.handbrake.fr/wiki/ConstantQuality <---- if you want to read more about constant quality.
https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/x264EncodingGuide <---- more reading.
post #5265 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post

Yes you will notice it on a large enough display. But not on your iPad.

Again... depends on the amount of compression applied. It's pretty easy to cut 10% of the size without losing any quality on pretty much any size screen you can fit in a normal house. You might notice a difference on a 4k screen but there hasn't been enough testing done with upscaling 1080 to 4k with re-encoded material. Typically someone wouldn't do this to save space as you wouldn't really be saving any but you might want to do it for playback compatibility.
post #5266 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by kawie01 View Post

Wife may watch on IPAD, I on my projector. So should I leave as is and just keep adding hard drives?

Using the equipment in my sig I can pick a movie from a mix of mkv and bit for bit Blu-ray on the movie wall of my Popcorn Hour and most often tell you which it is when I play it. Maybe you can do it with your equipment. Maybe not.
post #5267 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by kawie01 View Post

So should I leave as is and just keep adding hard drives?
That is what many of us do. There is no right decision, it is personal based on what you see and how much time you want to spend re-encoding. Just know that there is always loss when re-encoding a source that is itself encoded with a lossy codec.
post #5268 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by kawie01 View Post

Bill,

Which settings, methods, programs would you recommend? Right now, I have movies between 15-25 gb. I wouldn't mind decreasing file size but I dont want to sacrifice quality. Looking to eventually getting a popcorn hour or Dune?

Thanks again for your help

If you want to try this you should run experiments to see if the difference between the original and compressed versions matter to you. I picked out a few chapters from titles I knew well and ran a series of tests. You should do the same rather than using someone else's judgments.

Or, if you are very skeptical about this or don't want to spend the time, just skip it and stick with the uncompressed versions. That is certainly the safest course.

I use HandBrake for compression:

  • for DVD: High profile, q=18
  • for Blu-ray: Normal profile, q=20


-Bill
post #5269 of 5714
Wow getting fairly technical. I may keep files as is and buy large capacity hard drives. May I ask about media players popcorn hour or dune. Pros and cons?
post #5270 of 5714
I ripped in mkv format using makemkv.
post #5271 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by kawie01 View Post

Bill,

Which settings, methods, programs would you recommend? Right now, I have movies between 15-25 gb. I wouldn't mind decreasing file size but I dont want to sacrifice quality. Looking to eventually getting a popcorn hour or Dune?

Thanks again for your help

You don't seem all that concerned with adding storage if needed? And more concerned with quality. So don't worry about re-encoding. If you don't NEED to save space or NEED to convert for compatibility then don't bother. Not sure if you've gotten this far but look into things like Plex and MediaBrowser3 for transcoding on the fly to mobile devices.
post #5272 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by techmattr View Post

Again... depends on the amount of compression applied. It's pretty easy to cut 10% of the size without losing any quality on pretty much any size screen you can fit in a normal house.
The effects of re-encoding and reduced bitrate are most easily seen on a large (60-65") sharp display with deep blacks (plasma). Any time I have experimented with re-encoding I see a picture that looks pretty much the same as the original in bright scenes with high motion. It is the dark scenes that suffer from the re-encoding. Where once I had smooth shades of black and fine shadow detail the re-encoded images lose the fine detail and the smooth blacks are now blotchy as if the bit-depth of the black palette was reduced. It is very obvious on my Panasonic 65VT60 -- and for me, quite unwatchable.
post #5273 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

The effects of re-encoding and reduced bitrate are most easily seen on a large (60-65") sharp display with deep blacks (plasma). Any time I have experimented with re-encoding I see a picture that looks pretty much the same as the original in bright scenes with high motion. It is the dark scenes that suffer from the re-encoding. Where once I had smooth shades of black and fine shadow detail the re-encoded images lose the fine detail and the smooth blacks are now blotchy as if the bit-depth of the black palette was reduced. It is very obvious on my Panasonic 65VT60.

Typical x264 settings generally reduce the file size about 60% or more. Even "higher quality" settings are around 50~40%. If you can see a difference in a 10% reduction using even the standard optimizations I would have to argue placebo. Obviously I haven't seen every TV with every bit of possible material re-encoded so it certainly possible you can generate a noticeable loss of quality on such a small reduction.
post #5274 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by techmattr View Post

You don't seem all that concerned with adding storage if needed? And more concerned with quality. So don't worry about re-encoding. If you don't NEED to save space or NEED to convert for compatibility then don't bother. Not sure if you've gotten this far but look into things like Plex and MediaBrowser3 for transcoding on the fly to mobile devices.



Your right I am not so much concerned about space, I just kept reading about using handbrake after (name ripping program here) that I thought I was missing something. I began to use Plex and like it. Glanced at JRiver. Debating on a streaming machine or building a htpc.

Thanks to all for clearing a path for me.
post #5275 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by techmattr View Post

If you can see a difference in a 10% reduction using even the standard optimizations I would have to argue placebo. Obviously I haven't seen every TV with every bit of possible material re-encoded so it certainly possible you can generate a noticeable loss of quality on such a small reduction.
Perhaps 10% would not be noticeable. But then a 10% reduction would hardly be worth the effort. Any time I've experimented it was a minimum of 25% reduction. A 25% reduction causes a noticeable degradation of the blacks and shadow detail I indicated.
post #5276 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

Perhaps 10% would not be noticeable. But then a 10% reduction would hardly be worth the effort. Any time I've experimented it was a minimum of 25% reduction. A 25% reduction causes a noticeable degradation of the blacks and shadow detail I indicated.

Yeah as I said you really can only convert and retain detail if you're doing it for format conversion. If you're concern is saving space then you're going to have to accept some loss of quality. It can definitely be minimized but it's not for the purist. 5TB and 6TB HDDs are available now so hopefully in the next year or so we start seeing 3TB and 4TB prices dropping and it really won't matter.

For me personally I have about 20TB of storage for movies and I don't really want to add any more than that. With my Blu-ray/DVD library I'd fill that up pretty quick so I opted to run quite a few movies through Handbrake. Some I compress more than other and some I even downscale to 720. I'm definitely not a purist but I've kept most movies at 100% but I'd have to say I really don't care about the quality of about 30% of my movies. 80's comedies.... I really don't need those in 1080p and HD audio biggrin.gif
post #5277 of 5714
I put all my BluRays through handbrake and watch them through my projector on a 120" screen, as long as you keep the bitrate between 6,000-10,000 you will be fine and really won't notice and visual degradation ( at least I don't) even in dark scenes or action scenes. I re encoded some as small as 5GB and they look fine to me, but of course this is a subjective personal thing, different strokes for different folks, there is no right or wrong, its all about what you want.
post #5278 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by techmattr View Post

For me personally I have about 20TB of storage for movies and I don't really want to add any more than that. With my Blu-ray/DVD library I'd fill that up pretty quick so I opted to run quite a few movies through Handbrake. Some I compress more than other and some I even downscale to 720. I'm definitely not a purist but I've kept most movies at 100% but I'd have to say I really don't care about the quality of about 30% of my movies. 80's comedies.... I really don't need those in 1080p and HD audio biggrin.gif
I have 16Tb on my media-PC that is used to supply my HD content and I don't intend to expand it further. The average size of a BD.m2ts file in my collection = 25GB so that works out to a server capacity of over 500 full bitrate BD titles. That's a lot, for me any way. As we add and watch titles, there are those that we can immediately say "I'll never watch that again" -- distressingly, too many of those. So I have a garbage folder where those titles go. When the day comes where I need space on the server, I'll just throw out the trash and make a whole bunch of room. Basically, I don't see the need to maintain my whole video collection on my servers.
post #5279 of 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

I have 16Tb on my media-PC that is used to supply my HD content and I don't intend to expand it further. The average size of a BD.m2ts file in my collection = 25GB so that works out to a server capacity of over 500 full bitrate BD titles. That's a lot, for me any way. As we add and watch titles, there are those that we can immediately say "I'll never watch that again" -- distressingly, too many of those. So I have a garbage folder where those titles go. When the day comes where I need space on the server, I'll just throw out the trash and make a whole bunch of room. Basically, I don't see the need to maintain my whole video collection on my servers.

Yep, just purged some BDs from my collection. I can't belive I bought some of these titles.

While I'm still patiently awaiting True Lies, DS9 and The Wonder Years.
post #5280 of 5714
Yeah I agree a big part of the BD ripping process should be determining "am I going to actually watch this or watch this again?"
For my purposes I'd rather compress those movies than not include as we want our entire library on the media server so it can be organized and cataloged. That way if family/friends want to see if I have something I don't have to dig through the boxes I've put my movies in. They can just log into Plex and check. Then view it right there if they want.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home