Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Software > Software for Windows

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-07-2012, 08:39 PM   #1
Mr. Pedantic
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 4,876
Default Handbrake 0.9.6 is out

http://handbrake.fr/?article=13

https://trac.handbrake.fr/milestone/HandBrake%200.9.6

What do you guys think of it? Like? Don't like?
Mr. Pedantic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 08:44 PM   #2
smitbret
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pocatello, ID
Posts: 2,372
Default

I think Ripbot264 is still a much better piece of software for the average encoder. Still needs too much explanation to get it going.

OTOH, not much else competes for the hardcore encoder.
smitbret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 09:41 PM   #3
bbhaag
Golden Member
 
bbhaag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,371
Default

I tried it and hated it. My biggest gripe about it was they got rid of the target size for videos. I loved typing in 180 mb and boom my file was size was just right. Now I have to either type in the bit rate I want or try my hand at that constant quality bs slider bar thingy...yuck.
I promptly uninstalled 0.9.6 and re installed 0.9.5.
bbhaag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 09:41 PM   #4
Jadow
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Upper Midwest - USA
Posts: 5,797
Default

wish they could figure out blu ray subtitles
Jadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2012, 03:04 AM   #5
Mr. Pedantic
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbhaag View Post
I tried it and hated it. My biggest gripe about it was they got rid of the target size for videos. I loved typing in 180 mb and boom my file was size was just right. Now I have to either type in the bit rate I want or try my hand at that constant quality bs slider bar thingy...yuck.
I promptly uninstalled 0.9.6 and re installed 0.9.5.
Hate that as well. I'm unsure about whether there are actual differences in quality between 0.9.5 and 0.9.6, given the same settings. But the only thing stopping me from moving back to 0.9.5 is anal retentiveness at having every piece of software in my computer as up to date as reasonably possible.
Mr. Pedantic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2012, 11:57 PM   #6
AkumaX
Lifer
 
AkumaX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 12,490
Default

any decent encoders out there that take advantage of QuickSync?
__________________
............................
HeetWear
(o_
(o_ (o_ / /
(/)_ (\)_ V_/_
AkumaX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2012, 08:58 PM   #7
bbhaag
Golden Member
 
bbhaag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,371
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Pedantic View Post
Hate that as well. I'm unsure about whether there are actual differences in quality between 0.9.5 and 0.9.6, given the same settings. But the only thing stopping me from moving back to 0.9.5 is anal retentiveness at having every piece of software in my computer as up to date as reasonably possible.
I gave the latest release a fare shake and honestly I didn't notice a difference in quality between the two versions. To be fair though most of my encodes are in SD quality not HD. I mostly do tv shows and dvd rips.
bbhaag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2012, 03:56 AM   #8
Kathi201
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 41
Default

Dont like............
Kathi201 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2012, 04:15 PM   #9
Anteaus
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,998
Default

I like constant quality, but I have to admit that whoever said that setting it to 20 will give good encodes is out of their mind. Maybe at native res, but most people are watching their 720X480 movies scaled up to 1920X1080 on their tvs. CQ between 13-15 and will get almost perfect encodes. File size will generally flucuate between 2.5 to 4GB per movie tho depending on noise, but if you're looking for long term backups I think it's worth the effort.

I've experimented with constant size extensively, but in my experience it's never as good as CQ at the same file size. For mobile devices sure, but if you're doing serious encodes for HTPC or future proofing, in my experience constant size can't touch the latest CQ. It's still up to the user though, and I respect that people still use constant size, though I can't understand it.
Anteaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.