4 ms·
But given that space is cheap and transcoding means you're necessarily compromising image quality, why bother re-encoding?
by DaiPlusPlus 4y ago
But given that space is cheap and transcoding means you're necessarily compromising image quality, why bother re-encoding?
- babypuncher 4y agoBecause I have a lot of shows and space isn't that cheap, especially on mobile devices. Video compression has improved a ton since the introduction of Blu-Ray in 2006. I can cut the average size of a 45 minute TV show from ~8-10GB on the disc to ~2GB with minimal or no perceptible quality loss. This makes a huge difference when I go to load up my iPad with movies and TV shows before I travel. I do not bother re-encoding anything on a 4K disc, I just rip them straight to my NAS and strip out foreign audio and subtitle tracks.
- paulmd 4y agoHEVC can produce extraordinary quality for the size (especially on cartoons/anime) but man it is a fucking CRUNCH to get it there. It makes even x264 look easy by comparison. And AV1 is a whole 'nother level past that... minutes per frame basically. But great size/quality. Just as a casual observation, you should look at hardware AV1 encoders once they come out, because they'll beat software HEVC with a hardware (read: fast) encoder. Of course you also have to have support in the devices to play it back... which can be a problem with HEVC as well.
- babypuncher 4y agoI may switch to AV1, but not until decoding support is ubiquitous within my device ecosystem. The big one is my iPad, I don't want to cut my battery life in half by watching movies with a software decoder during a long flight. Seeing as the M2 and A16 both still lack AV1 decoders, I might be waiting a little while, which is fine since it gives encoders and processor speed more time to catch up to the speeds I currently get with x265.