Handbrake 0.9.6 is out

Discussion in 'Software for Windows' started by Mr. Pedantic, Apr 7, 2012.

  1. Mr. Pedantic

    Mr. Pedantic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2010
    Messages:
    5,040
    Likes Received:
    0
  2. smitbret

    smitbret Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,290
    Likes Received:
    1
    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.
     
  3. bbhaag

    bbhaag Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    1
    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.
     
  4. Jadow

    Jadow Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2003
    Messages:
    5,962
    Likes Received:
    1
    wish they could figure out blu ray subtitles
     
  5. Mr. Pedantic

    Mr. Pedantic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2010
    Messages:
    5,040
    Likes Received:
    0
    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.
     
  6. AkumaX

    AkumaX Lifer

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2000
    Messages:
    12,640
    Likes Received:
    2
    any decent encoders out there that take advantage of QuickSync?
     
  7. bbhaag

    bbhaag Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    1
    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.
     
  8. Kathi201

    Kathi201 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2012
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dont like............:(
     
  9. Anteaus

    Anteaus Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    2,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    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.
     
Loading...