best x264 encoding software.

[Anteaus]

Yes, without it it will split files to maintain compatibility with filesystems such as FAT32 and standalone players. I didn't realize that is what you were referring to. I obviously check Large File Size.


That was my whole point.



I am not interested in PS3 or xbox compatibility, PC is all I want.

No problem. You may not care about console compatibility, but one day you might need to use a media extender in some capacity and this might come back to bite you, but I understand your choices. Note I'm mainly talking about DVDs. If your encoding blu-ray then obviously splitting the files can get quite ridiculous lol.

 

[Rifter]

I use handbrake when encoding for reduced file size. But since HD space is so cheap i tend to just use makeMKV and rip DVD's and BR's uncomressed for no loss of quality.

 

[Anteaus]

I use handbrake when encoding for reduced file size. But since HD space is so cheap i tend to just use makeMKV and rip DVD's and BR's uncomressed for no loss of quality.

If size is no issue, I would suggest you use VOB2MPG for DVDs. It simply takes the VOB files and reorganizes them into one large MPG2 file. There is absolutely no loss in quality as there is no transcode.

 

[Rifter]

If size is no issue, I would suggest you use VOB2MPG for DVDs. It simply takes the VOB files and reorganizes them into one large MPG2 file. There is absolutely no loss in quality as there is no transcode.

this is exactly what makeMKV does but into a mkv container.

 

[Rackmountsales]

A few encoding softwares like Handbrake, Xvid4PSP, StaxRip, RipBot264, FairUse Wizard, MEGUI are also good, Just depends on your requirement.

 

[Cogman]

CQ=constant quality. I agree that the manual shows an RF20, but considering if your making a serious encode its likely your going to be scaling it up to 1080P making artifacts much more apparent, especially banding. At resolution, RF20 is fine. In my experience, at RF of 15 or 16 gives a much cleaner picture at "somewhat reasonable" file sizes. I say somewhat, but it is still half of source usually, unless there is a lot of pixel noise. For the most part if the dvd has a clean mpg2 encode, then that will translate to a lower filesize using CQ for the same quality.

Please, don't upscale your encodes. There is no reason for this on PC systems. The only time you should upscale an encode is if your target device has a particularly crappy upscaler. Upscaling increases the needed bitrate for quality for no gain.


talimer did you ever get the problem with the .0024 sized files fixed? That sounds to me like something in your encoding chain has become broken.

Also, those settings are pretty extreme (Do you want this encode to finish in your lifetime ). And the deblocking settings are WAY too high (this does NOT improve quality). I recommend putting your deblocking settings down to 0 and possibly even -1 for live action footage. It should only really be a 1 or a 2 for animated footage. 6's are just a little extreme.

As for the ref and bframe settings. Those are really pretty high as well. after 6 reference frames the quality gain is essentially 0, especially for live action footage. There is a larger benefit in animated footage, but that is mostly from bframes (the difference between 16 and 6 reference frames, even in animated footage, is somewhere around 0.1%) Decreasing the reference frames will significantly increase your encoding speeds.

Your motion estimation is also WAY too high. This can actually decrease the quality of encodes. A motion estimation of about 24 is the most anyone should ever do. In fact, that may be the issue. The size of your motion estimation may be causing x264 to consume WAY too much memory.

 

[taltamir]

talimer did you ever get the problem with the .0024 sized files fixed? That sounds to me like something in your encoding chain has become broken.

I found that if I lower the "Maximum B-Frames" setting from 16 back to default (default is 3, "sane values" are 2-5) it doesn't error out and will proceed to encode the movie fully. Seems there is some sort of a bug when running on max everything.

Also, those settings are pretty extreme (Do you want this encode to finish in your lifetime ). And the deblocking settings are WAY too high (this does NOT improve quality). I recommend putting your deblocking settings down to 0 and possibly even -1 for live action footage. It should only really be a 1 or a 2 for animated footage. 6's are just a little extreme.

Sure are . On the machine in my sig it takes a 1080p 2 hour movie 2 days straight to encode. But its very plausible for shorter and lower resolution movies. A clip under 10 minutes with 320p resolution takes less then an hour to reencode with very impressive results. Useful for certain types of conversions. The only thing stopping me from using it on 1080p films right now is the lack of a "pause" option. I wouldn't mind letting it run overnight and while I am in school for a few days, but I can't go 2 days without using my computer at all (all cores are hammered at 100% and system is very unresponsive when using it on 1080p... suprisingly only ~50% CPU utilization on 320p with identical setting)

As for the ref and bframe settings. Those are really pretty high as well. after 6 reference frames the quality gain is essentially 0, especially for live action footage. There is a larger benefit in animated footage, but that is mostly from bframes (the difference between 16 and 6 reference frames, even in animated footage, is somewhere around 0.1%) Decreasing the reference frames will significantly increase your encoding speeds.

Your motion estimation is also WAY too high. This can actually decrease the quality of encodes. A motion estimation of about 24 is the most anyone should ever do. In fact, that may be the issue. The size of your motion estimation may be causing x264 to consume WAY too much memory.

Yea, I know... those things are listed outside of the "sane range", I intentionally set everything to max quality even if it triples the time to encode for 1% compression gain. if its a short small film that is still fine.

 

[Cogman]

Yea, I know... those things are listed outside of the "sane range", I intentionally set everything to max quality even if it triples the time to encode for 1% compression gain. if its a short small film that is still fine.

Like I said, many of those setting aren't even improving your quality by 1%, some are even decreasing (see specifically what I said about the deblock and motion estimation).

 

[Anteaus]

Please, don't upscale your encodes. There is no reason for this on PC systems. The only time you should upscale an encode is if your target device has a particularly crappy upscaler. Upscaling increases the needed bitrate for quality for no gain.

I may have misrepresented myself. I don't upscale the encodes. They are encoded at source resolution. I meant that it is inevitable that at some point these files will be scaled at decode due to high resolution displays, and "good enough" at dvd resolution suddenly becomes a little more questionable. In my experience, Handbrake can struggle with shadow banding (I'm not sure how else to describe it) that is remedied at lower RF values. My personal rule is RF15 unless file size >4GB, in which case I will raise the value by .5 and try again until it fits. Takes about 3 hours for an encode on my C2D E6850 3GHz. I can't wait for Sandy Bridge.

I pixel peep more than I should. What is truly annoying are DVDs with a poor MPG2 encode. Some of them look awful from the start.

 

[taltamir]

Like I said, many of those setting aren't even improving your quality by 1%, some are even decreasing (see specifically what I said about the deblock and motion estimation).

interesting, this seem to contradict what the handbrake manual says, but manuals can be wrong.
Anyone has more specific info about this? links? discussions? etc.

 

[Anteaus]

I have a question for anyone with an answer. All of my encodes were of DVDs, so I have very little knowledge of transcoding Blu-ray. I've read that many Blu-ray movies are already encoded in H.264. Does anyone find this to be true? And if so, are you keeping its original encode or are you using handbrake to sqeeze it down in size? Obviously creating mobile versions require reencoding, but I mainly asking about same as original.

Just curious. I'm building a new machine soon that will enclude a blu-ray burner so I'm wondering how to approach it. I'm in the process of "future proofing" my movie collection.

 

[taltamir]

many but not all blurays are h264. Some are VC1 or even MPEG2.
Its really up to you on whether you reencode it to squeeze down the size or keep it untouched. I have done both for different movies.

 

[Anteaus]

many but not all blurays are h264. Some are VC1 or even MPEG2.
Its really up to you on whether you reencode it to squeeze down the size or keep it untouched. I have done both for different movies.

For every movie I keep two versions. A "as close as original" version as well as a mobile version. My uncompressed DVD collection was already past 2 TB so I'm stretched for space. I have quite a few Blu-ray movies so it tooks like I need to come up with a strategy for storing that much data with redundancy. Time to build that server i've been putting off I guess.

 

[taltamir]

I highly recommend going with a server. Use ZFS, with either FreeBSD or SolarisExpress 11 or an illumos build as OS. If using solaris use their excellent CIFS kernel level driver for sharing with windows machines. Either 6 drive RAIDz2 or multiple RAID1s with ZFS (easier to upgrade).
Just use a gigE switch (very important to use a switch and not a router!), and GigE controllers with jumbo frames (very important, tremendous speed increase and CPU usage decrease).

 

[Cogman]

interesting, this seem to contradict what the handbrake manual says, but manuals can be wrong.
Anyone has more specific info about this? links? discussions? etc.

Discussions on deblock
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=157742&highlight=deblock
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=109747&highlight=deblock <- A highly detailed description of what it is and how to use it.

And here is a little discussion on merange.
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=134179&highlight=merange

 

[Cogman]

I have a question for anyone with an answer. All of my encodes were of DVDs, so I have very little knowledge of transcoding Blu-ray. I've read that many Blu-ray movies are already encoded in H.264. Does anyone find this to be true? And if so, are you keeping its original encode or are you using handbrake to sqeeze it down in size? Obviously creating mobile versions require reencoding, but I mainly asking about same as original.

Just curious. I'm building a new machine soon that will enclude a blu-ray burner so I'm wondering how to approach it. I'm in the process of "future proofing" my movie collection.

Blu-ray supports a quagmire of standards from VC-1, to H264, to good ole MPEG-2.

Many bluray's right now are encoded to the H264 standard, but not all. Honestly, the movie producers are trying to use up every last drop of disk space, so you aren't going to see too much of a difference from an H264 encode and a MPEG2 encode.