4 ms·
I've actually found my videos are not increasing as rapidly as I would expect. I've been reencoding in x265 and the file size difference is shocking. Right now
by jaggederest 3y ago
I've actually found my videos are not increasing as rapidly as I would expect. I've been reencoding in x265 and the file size difference is shocking. Right now I'm not ditching the existing original files but I may do that at some point, or just offload to a cloud service like Glacier
- tokamak-teapot 3y agoI’m right up next to a limit on live (easily-accessible, always visible in photo apps) cloud storage, with years of family photos and video taking about 95% of that. I definitely don’t want to delete any of it, so I have been just hoping for bigger storage to be offered soon, but… I hadn’t considered that re-encoding could be an option. I take standalone snapshots of everything every few months so if re-encoding would make a significant difference I might have to try this. Do you have any tips on tools, parameters etc. that work well for you, please?
- jaggederest 3y agoI use a shell script with ffmpeg. I encourage you to check out what works best for you but honestly the quality is pretty stellar with just a really simple one like mkdir -p reencoded ffmpeg -i input_filename.mp4 -c:v libx265 -crf 26 -preset fast -c:a aac -b:a 128k reencoded/output_filename.mp4 That's a fast single-pass constant quality encode - a two-pass encode would be better quality for the size but I find that very acceptable. It knocks down what would be a ~2gb file all the way to between 800mb - 1200mb with very reasonable quality, sometimes even more - I've seen a 5gb file become a 400mb file (!!). You can experiment with the -crf 26 parameter to get the quality/size tradeoff you like. I run that over every video in the directory as a cron job basically.