| Page 1 of 1 |
|
|
 Posted: Thu, 11th Sep 2008 21:11 Post subject: x264 vs Blu-Ray |
|
 |
Is there any comparison done on video quality from an x264 1080p vs blu-ray?
Looking to rip collection onto hd for media server and wondering if the quality drop is noticable?
Thanks
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu, 11th Sep 2008 21:24 Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1025863
basically the message is that your 1080p rips need to be over 10 mbit/s to be comparable while 720p needs ~6-7 mbit/s
so for a 2 hour movie you want dvd-9 sized 720p rips and for 1080p it needs to be about 13gb or so for it to look exactly like the source.
asus z170-A || core i5-6600K || geforce gtx 970 4gb || 16gb ddr4 ram || win10 || 1080p led samsung 27"
Last edited by nouseforaname on Thu, 11th Sep 2008 21:33; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 11th Sep 2008 21:31 Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the quick reply!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 05:57 Post subject: |
|
|
Use x264 CRF mode with a CRF value of 19 or lower to achieve transparent quality. More efficient higher quality settings allow you to achieve that quality at a lower bitrate.
That applies not only to Blu-Ray but for any source. That's because CRF mode maintains constant quality throughout the rip without being limited by a target bitrate or file size since it's a 1-pass mode.
It does this by gauging the complexity of the source. As a result, source characteristics, such as resolution, are automatically taken into account in CRF mode.
It's sort-of like VBR mode in Nero AAC, where you specify the quality (q=0.xx) and the encoder maintains that quality without regard for a target bitrate or file size.
Btw, keeping .flac seems like a waste of bitrate, encoding with Nero AAC with q=0.45 or 0.55 may be better.
Also btw, a topic title of "Achieving transparent quality Blu-Ray -> x264" might be more accurate since you don't want a noticeable quality drop when ripping your collection. As a bonus, using the same CRF value for your entire collection will ensure the same quality throughout your collection.
Check the Doom9 forums for more info, but be sure to read the rules first!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 16:35 Post subject: |
|
|
Nouse, scene is all about the size of the release meeting retarded 'standards,' no matter the quality achieved.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 17:28 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | | Nouse, scene is all about the size of the release meeting retarded 'standards,' no matter the quality achieved. |
thats why those idiots still use XVID to compress all then X264
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 17:37 Post subject: |
|
|
I was talking about the retarded 'HD' h264 scene, but sure, what you say is also true. No reason at all to use shitty mpeg 4 asp (xvid, divx, etc), only for cheap asses that can't upgrade their 5 year old shitty players.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 19:05 Post subject: |
|
|
The HD scene isn't nearly as retarded as the DVD rip scene. They keep the original resolution at least while DVD rips usually have a vertical res. of ~300 pixels (vs. 576/480 on PAL/NTSC DVD). MOST RETARDED SCENE RULE EVER!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 19:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| me7 wrote: | | They keep the original resolution at least |
Eh? 720 is much smaller than the regular 1080. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 19:19 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | | me7 wrote: | | They keep the original resolution at least |
Eh? 720 is much smaller than the regular 1080. |
Come on, there is always a 1080p version as well for us quality freaks and 720p versions are useful for people with 720p TVs who want to save bandwidth wheras nobody needs a 512x300 rip. Proper DVD rips should keep the original anamorphic 720x576 res.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 19:29 Post subject: |
|
|
| me7 wrote: | | Proper DVD rips should keep the original anamorphic 720x576 res. |
/agree
especially since you can't get everything in HD.
asus z170-A || core i5-6600K || geforce gtx 970 4gb || 16gb ddr4 ram || win10 || 1080p led samsung 27"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 19:36 Post subject: |
|
|
| me7 wrote: | | LeoNatan wrote: | | me7 wrote: | | They keep the original resolution at least |
Eh? 720 is much smaller than the regular 1080. |
Come on, there is always a 1080p version as well for us quality freaks and 720p versions are useful for people with 720p TVs who want to save bandwidth wheras nobody needs a 512x300 rip. Proper DVD rips should keep the original anamorphic 720x576 res. |
You sure 1080p content is scene? I'm not. But at any rate, there isn't any scene content at 480p/576p because MPEG4 ASP is not competent enough to compress at that resolution and still show up a good picture @ ridiculous 700/1400 MB limit. You either get macroblocking or blur. h264 can, but because retarded 5 year old players can't play it on 320x240 TVs ( ), scene forbids anything other than XVID, unless internal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 19:44 Post subject: |
|
|
case in point for scene retardedness...
Kill Bill #1 and #2 ... top reviews for video quality of the BluRay (original bitrate is ~30 mbps) for both discs.
Septic releases pt 1 as dvd5 and pt 2 as dvd9 ... sure there is about 25 mins difference between the two (110 mins vs 135) but both should be the same. They also lie about bitrate in their nfo since it says the same thing for both (7665 mbps which is probably KB2).
asus z170-A || core i5-6600K || geforce gtx 970 4gb || 16gb ddr4 ram || win10 || 1080p led samsung 27"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 12th Sep 2008 19:50 Post subject: |
|
|
Well, regular CRT TVs, aren't they 320x240? 
Content here is broadcast at 640x480 MPEG2, but at horrendous bitrates on most channels, so yeah, macroblocking aplenty.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2008 05:07 Post subject: |
|
|
Mark my words... it's only a matter of time before an x264 release group emerges offering high quality releases using x264 CRF mode 
The question is... will people be smart enough to appreciate such HQ rips and would the scene smarten-up by making the switch to x264 and follow suit 
| me7 wrote: | | Proper DVD rips should keep the original anamorphic 720x576 res. |
Why not crop the borders and encode anamorphic?
Eg. If borders at right=10px, left=10px, top=8px then crop(10,8,-10,0) and use --sar 16:15 (for PAL).
So the stored resolution becomes 700x568 and the displayed resolution becomes 746x568 instead of the original 768x576. This ensures the image is not distorted, so circles remain circles instead of becoming ellipses.
Alternatively, after cropping, the original displayed resolution can be obtained by using an appropriate --sar or by resizing to 720x576 and using --sar 16:15. However, those approaches distort the image, resulting in circles becoming ellipses.
Removing borders improves quality slightly by avoiding the sharp contrast between borders and the image. If the resolution isn't mod16 then x264 simply pads it with the line at the bottom/right of the image (but keeps the padding hidden of course).
Last edited by Avenger007 on Sat, 13th Sep 2008 09:04; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2008 07:38 Post subject: |
|
|
Such rips already exist in the form of a sister site to the major HD content site.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2008 09:36 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2008 16:10 Post subject: |
|
|
video quality has alot to do with the source material , bluray or not, predator is a good example where i cant tell alot of difference between 1080p and my original DVD.
I cant complain about HD releases really, if its on bluray or HD-DVD usually both 720p and 1080p versions are released.
720p is simply alot more popular cause its usually 4gb rip ( 6gb if its a longer movie with multiple DTS tracks ) so those fit on one DVD, also remember most LCDs sold are still 1280*1024 which means a 1:1 pixel ratio with 720p. basicly for many 720p is such a big improvement over dvdrips they cant tell the difference between 720p/1080p which would require a full HD screen anyhow.
To be honest i never saw an original bluray, but from the 8gb 1080p rips i watched they looked damn good and couldnt tell any artifacting in most of them.
And yea why the "scene" isnt using x264 for DVD i have no clue at all, XVID is so horrible these days, why even bother ripping a DVD to 512* resolution ? worst of all they make a 2x700mb rip to add AC3 sound....
Really with x264 you can make a 700mb rip in the original 720* resolution and add DTS along with it, you can hardly tell the difference.
Perfect example is the dark knight dvdscreener release, the xvid one and even the DVD-R scene releases were horrible compared to the "fan" made x264 rip.
Why would anyone want xvid still? you only need a 2.3ghz athlon to play 1080p content, for dvd resolutions its even alot less. You need the x264 codec of course, which takes 30 seconds to download and install.... last time i checked the same went for xvid since it doesnt come with windows either.
Now if someone wants to watch it on his home tv.... playstation 3 allows x264, can even use its own container files aka convert your mkvs to it( although i cant get the subtitles to work ever). HTPCs are dirtcheap to make , 250 bucks for HDMI - optical out and specs that play any movies out now.
If the scene really wants to keep xvid for whatever reason, why not do dual releases? 1 700mb rip in xvid and 1 700mb rip in x264, that simple.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2008 16:13 Post subject: |
|
|
Q:Why would anyone want xvid still?
A:Those dumb fucks play movies on they PS3 or X360 or burn CDs to view it on a DVD player
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2008 16:24 Post subject: |
|
|
360 supports 720p WMVs, of which there are aplenty. PS3s support DVD5 Blurays.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon, 15th Sep 2008 16:52 Post subject: |
|
|
| Spiderman wrote: | Q:Why would anyone want xvid still?
A: dumb fucks |
asus z170-A || core i5-6600K || geforce gtx 970 4gb || 16gb ddr4 ram || win10 || 1080p led samsung 27"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Mon, 15th Sep 2008 19:01 Post subject: |
|
|
Exactly.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
I pray for the sake of mankind that this is just a typo (though I don't know about Israeli TV standards)
Unfortunately I'm a total n00b (as you can see from my post count 
), so I'm not sure I know the major HD content site or the sister site you're referring to. 
