For those of you that torrent video files this question is geared toward you. I’m looking for a sweet spot between quality, size & speed for HEVC encoding. I’m using FastFlix and seem to be getting really wide and varying speeds.

I’m not really literate on all this video lingo but I can, at least, get it going. Most files take anywhere from 5-17 mins for a 30-40 mins clip. I have a AMD Radeon RX 470 graphics card but when I try and use the VCEEnc it won’t let me use CRF which I’ve heard it the best way.

Anyway, if you’re willing to share knowledge or what settings you use when you convert video to HEVC that might help me speed up my processing, I would be eternally grateful.

  • Xanza@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    19 days ago

    I’m confused… Are you grabbing pirated video files from the net and re-encoding them… If you’re attempting to further compress already compressed video, you’re just zipping a zip file. It’s crazy and you’ll do nothing but bloat the file size (versus a properly compressed video file) and further reduce the quality of the video via artifacts. I’ll call the police and have you committed right now.

    If you’re grabbing 8/4k or UHD BD movies and re-encoding them into lets say, 1080p HEVC 10bit, I could see that being worth it if you really love the movie (and have 5 days with nothing to do), but only if you’re going from an inferior compression to better (h264 to h265), otherwise like I said, you’re zipping a zip file.

    • fakeplastic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 days ago

      you’ll do nothing but bloat the file size

      That’s very wrong. Going from h.264 to h.265 cuts file size down to 25-50% of the original. That’s what the HE is for in HEVC.

      • Xanza@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        19 days ago
        1. I’ve been encoding HEVC for a long time and I’ve not once seen a file-size drop that dramatically. You’re outrageously overestimating the file-size savings here.
        2. If a video file is already compressed you’ll see diminished and even negative returns by attempting to compress it further. OP seems to be taking pre compressed video files from the internet and attempting to compress them again (lossy to lossy) which is very very very stupid.
      • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        19 days ago

        You’re correct that it will reduce file size but encoding lossy to lossy is foolish. You will introduce compression artifacts and have an objectively worse quality image, the encode will take much longer than if you used a proper lossless source, and if you don’t set your configs right you’ll strip out subtitles, tags, chapters, etc

        Additionally if the h264 was already compressed by a lot h265 won’t save all that much space, giving you all the downsides with basically no upside

        Only dummies encode lossy>lossy. The debate about lossy>h265 is one thing (h265 is not for archival) but h264>h265 will result in visible distortion

        • fakeplastic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          19 days ago

          I also went through the phase where I thought I was an audiophile/videophile and everything I collected needed to be in ultra high quality. Eventually I realized it was stupid and now I spend a third as much money on storage and still have perfectly fine media that I have no issues with in practice despite the flaws I’m supposed to see in theory.

          • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            19 days ago

            I don’t understand what you are arguing?

            If you’re arguing that downloading remuxes and only flac is foolish then yeah, 99.8% of the time h264 and 320 mp3 are going to be indistinguishable on most setups with most content. H265 will be the same on like 99.5% of setups with slightly less content and will save tons of space. Sure. But this assumes the lossy encodes were done properly from a lossless master

            if you encode lossy to lossy it will result in visible and audible distortion of the image and audio. Sometimes it’s minimal, sometimes it’s quite bad, sometimes it’s masked by your equipment, but it’s always there. Further, you’d spend more money on electricity running your cpu on full blast encoding terabytes of video files when you could simply just redownload your library in whatever format by someone who knows what they’re doing (if you’re so concerned about space and don’t care about quality go av1)

            But you do you

    • jerb@lemmy.croc.pw
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      19 days ago

      Blu-rays are compressed. “Zipping a zip file” doesn’t apply here because zips are lossless. Video encoding is almost entirely lossy, and there’s a lot of tradeoffs to be made between file size and quality. The whole point of the more efficient codecs is to minimize the quality tradeoff. There’s also a bunch of parameters to tune the resulting bitrate which is the #1 factor in deciding the final filesize.

      That being said, I’ll agree that the least quality loss will come from using a Blu-ray remux since those are very high quality.

      • Xanza@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        19 days ago

        Blu-rays are compressed.

        All streaming data is compressed at some point. I clearly meant not over-compressed. 4K video or UHD BD can both be taken from their original states and processed through HEVC to get crisp 1080p h265 10bit at a steep data discount. But it’ll take a very long time to process. It’s simply not worth it.

        “Zipping a zip file” doesn’t apply here because zips are lossless.

        It’s a figurative expression and I feel that was pretty damn obvious…