| Page 1 of 2 |
Horrordee
Soderator
Posts: 8868
Location: England
|
 Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 11:14 Post subject: x265 |
|
 |
My NAS just grabbed the following release:
You.Were.Never.Really.Here.2017.1080p.10bit.BluRay.6CH.x265.HEVC-PSA
It's a 1.5 hour film, 10 bit HDR, 1080p granted but with 6 channel audio - and the best part? It's just 1.2gb. ONE POINT TWO GB.
It looks amazing.
Why the hell aren't the groups doing more with x265. It's bloody amazing!
Space for rent. Contact me for rates!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 11:29 Post subject: |
|
|
My understanding is that there are two general drawbacks.
1). h265 is not as widely compatible with playback devices as h264 is.
2). h264 encoders are more mature than h265 in terms of squeezing the best video quality out in a short time. In other words, it takes more time and computing resources to encode a good looking h265 video.
If someone takes the time to make a good h265 encode it will have a smaller file size but it took much longer to make than if they chose to encode in h264. The latest video cards have hardware acceleration to encode to h265 but my understanding is that the quality is inferior versus a software encode.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 11:44 Post subject: |
|
|
@Horrordee
Quality is good, yes. However, considering its size it's safe to assume that some small details are missing or blurred more than they should be (wrinkles, age spots etc etc) . x265 is a very efficient codec when making small size encodes, however, if you want to get the same level of detail as x264 or remux, then the size will be noticeably larger. Smaller than x264, but not as small as,for instance, this rip
1) Lenovo Legion 7 (AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, RTX 3080 16Gb, 32Gb DDR4, SSD 1TB +2TB
2) SFFPC (streaming via Moonlight+ Sunshine)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 12:21 Post subject: |
|
|
High resolution content (4K and up) is assumed to contain more detail than 1080p in parts of the image that are in focus and more redundancy in parts that are not in focus and therefore blurry. HEVC is a lot more efficient than AVC at high resolutions because it's encoder spends more time looking for said redundancies and storing them in clever ways.
At 1080p with ultra low bitrates, x265 may be better at presenting a pleasant blurry image without noticeable macroblocks than x264. However, as you approach bitrates that are required to preserve detail, x265 advantage diminishes.
If some breakthrough has happened in x265 during the past months that I have missed, feel free to correct me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 12:29 Post subject: |
|
|
Very small details are better on H264 or other high quality codecs, but it depends really for the material if you need it, especially the source material, the difference on file size is absolutely insane. Im doing video editing at work, and i needed to put H265 and Prores422HQ encodes on one project side by side under magnifying glass to notice any difference on 32" monitor.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 13:08 Post subject: |
|
|
HEVC/H265 doesn't use macroblocks of fixed size as AVC/H264, thus the better flexibility when it comes to bitrate distribution regarding image details. (It uses CTU).
Don't forget that H265 was originally intended for 4K video, thus there is no point in preserving each little pixel detail when it will be viewed on a high-density screen. But it doesn't distort the video as AVC (it does in different way, see HERE and HERE).
Regarding the amazing releases, check out Tigole encoder at frrrt and his fantastic work. PSA is Indian "group", they are OK but they were not consistent with quality and originally were using Bluray rips as sources (now they use Bluray remuxes AFAIK).
Also, 10-bit doesn't mean 10-bit HDR, check it out here why they use 10-bit even for regular 8-bit video sources:
https://gist.github.com/l4n9th4n9/4459997
- dont post websites with illegal content pls, you should know the rules
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3E74
Posts: 2559
Location: feels wrong
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 13:18 Post subject: |
|
|
i dont like these (mini) x265 rips..
When theres a fast moving scene with action i prefeer x264 with an higher bitrate, its just a cleaner picture.
Also my GPU only does x264 not x265 native decoding..
..:: Life - A sexually transmitted disease which always ends in death. There is currently no known cure::.. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WaldoJ
VIP Member
Posts: 32678
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 13:22 Post subject: |
|
|
| Breezer_ wrote: | | Very small details are better on H264 or other high quality codecs, but it depends really for the material if you need it, especially the source material, the difference on file size is absolutely insane. Im doing video editing at work, and i needed to put H265 and Prores422HQ encodes on one project side by side under magnifying glass to notice any difference on 32" monitor. |
Did you just compare a .raw file to .jpeg?
265 takes a bit to encode.
It's demanding.
It's still in "beta"
By 2020 it'll be the codec used everywhere.
| Sin317 wrote: | | I win, you lose. Or Go fuck yourself. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stige
Posts: 3545
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 13:32 Post subject: |
|
|
HEVC is the king. Fuck anything else these days, H264 is so outdated.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 13:37 Post subject: |
|
|
| WaldoJ wrote: | | Breezer_ wrote: | | Very small details are better on H264 or other high quality codecs, but it depends really for the material if you need it, especially the source material, the difference on file size is absolutely insane. Im doing video editing at work, and i needed to put H265 and Prores422HQ encodes on one project side by side under magnifying glass to notice any difference on 32" monitor. |
Did you just compare a .raw file to .jpeg?
265 takes a bit to encode.
It's demanding.
It's still in "beta"
By 2020 it'll be the codec used everywhere. |
Basically.. if you put it that way, but the difference here is that all color grading and stuff were already made to the source material, i just compared final exports (H265 and Prores422HQ).
Im talking now about videos that has resolutions like over 14k pixels wide, massive panorama videos stitched together from 4x 4k footage from GH5 cameras. The final space required for each video in prores is insane, and thanks to Apple and their 250GB SSD drives on Mac Pro base model, i need to start experimenting, before i buy shitloads of external SSD drives for the show playback Mac Pro´s.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 14:20 Post subject: |
|
|
@Guy_Incognito | Quote: | | check out Tigole encoder at frrrt a |
Yeah, his rips are great.
1) Lenovo Legion 7 (AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, RTX 3080 16Gb, 32Gb DDR4, SSD 1TB +2TB
2) SFFPC (streaming via Moonlight+ Sunshine)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WaldoJ
VIP Member
Posts: 32678
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Apr 2018 14:58 Post subject: |
|
|
| Breezer_ wrote: | | WaldoJ wrote: | | Breezer_ wrote: | | Very small details are better on H264 or other high quality codecs, but it depends really for the material if you need it, especially the source material, the difference on file size is absolutely insane. Im doing video editing at work, and i needed to put H265 and Prores422HQ encodes on one project side by side under magnifying glass to notice any difference on 32" monitor. |
Did you just compare a .raw file to .jpeg?
265 takes a bit to encode.
It's demanding.
It's still in "beta"
By 2020 it'll be the codec used everywhere. |
Basically.. if you put it that way, but the difference here is that all color grading and stuff were already made to the source material, i just compared final exports (H265 and Prores422HQ).
Im talking now about videos that has resolutions like over 14k pixels wide, massive panorama videos stitched together from 4x 4k footage from GH5 cameras. The final space required for each video in prores is insane, and thanks to Apple and their 250GB SSD drives on Mac Pro base model, i need to start experimenting, before i buy shitloads of external SSD drives for the show playback Mac Pro´s. |
OWC friend. 20tb, Thunderbolt for 1600 cad.
CAD to finny money is like
265 goes in blocks. It's fantastic. For show demos, hdr, and all.
Encoding is a bit long though 
All smart tvs play 265 natively. Not much for prores.
Size difference is massive.
From 18gig 4 min file to 1.3 at 60 in 265.
Though I keep running into colour banding which is annoying at times.
Don't even try comparing to 4444x lol. Yeesh.
But yeah, 2020 Olympics will be broadcast in 4K hdr live.
So by then 265 should be standard as bandwidth increases in North America and playback becomes native.
| Sin317 wrote: | | I win, you lose. Or Go fuck yourself. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
VIP Member
Posts: 51423
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 10:48 Post subject: |
|
|
True, it seems not to be as good with detail as x264 is but it's such a small difference as opposed to the huuuuge size difference that it has been my go to format every time since it's been around 
| boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote: | | i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stige
Posts: 3545
Location: Finland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 11:47 Post subject: |
|
|
@Stige
Whaaat? 
| Quote: | | , the quality has to be terrible really, no way around it. |
Get any REMUX and Tigole release and compare them
PS Unfortunately screenshotcomparison site has stopped working, so here is imgur link (Lady Bird) 15GB vs 3.10 GB
https://imgur.com/a/LFoKQ
And the film is kinda grainy, so you need more bitrate.
1) Lenovo Legion 7 (AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, RTX 3080 16Gb, 32Gb DDR4, SSD 1TB +2TB
2) SFFPC (streaming via Moonlight+ Sunshine)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stige
Posts: 3545
Location: Finland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73220
Location: Ramat HaSharon, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 14:27 Post subject: |
|
|
| me7 wrote: | At 1080p with ultra low bitrates, x265 may be better at presenting a pleasant blurry image without noticeable macroblocks than x264. However, as you approach bitrates that are required to preserve detail, x265 advantage diminishes.
If some breakthrough has happened in x265 during the past months that I have missed, feel free to correct me. |
Nope, still true, and will remains so for years to come. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3E74
Posts: 2559
Location: feels wrong
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 14:31 Post subject: |
|
|
are there any HDR 1080p releases? Or are they only coming in 4k HDR?
4K is to much for me, but i like HDR..
..:: Life - A sexually transmitted disease which always ends in death. There is currently no known cure::..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 14:33 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | | me7 wrote: | At 1080p with ultra low bitrates, x265 may be better at presenting a pleasant blurry image without noticeable macroblocks than x264. However, as you approach bitrates that are required to preserve detail, x265 advantage diminishes.
If some breakthrough has happened in x265 during the past months that I have missed, feel free to correct me. |
Nope, still true, and will remains so for years to come. |
A "proper" details-wise x265 1080p rip is still considerably smaller than a 1080p x264 rip though.
1) Lenovo Legion 7 (AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, RTX 3080 16Gb, 32Gb DDR4, SSD 1TB +2TB
2) SFFPC (streaming via Moonlight+ Sunshine) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 14:46 Post subject: |
|
|
Are you guys using proper HDR screen to view those "amazing" HDR rips? 95% of HDR TV´s today does not have real HDR.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stige
Posts: 3545
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 14:56 Post subject: |
|
|
| Breezer_ wrote: | | Are you guys using proper HDR screen to view those "amazing" HDR rips? 95% of HDR TV´s today does not have real HDR. |
Define real HDR.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 15:46 Post subject: |
|
|
Well it's capability of a screen to output more light than standard TV. It's not just color depth.
Standard TVs have typical brightness up to 400 nits, while HDR TV brightness should measure in thousands of nits, yet e.g. Sony sells X850D with like 1100 nits and it counts as HDR.
Again, 10-bit and 10-bit HDR are not the same thing:
Non-HDR ultra-HD: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
HDR ultra-HD: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2100
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stige
Posts: 3545
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 19:04 Post subject: |
|
|
| Guy_Incognito wrote: | Well it's capability of a screen to output more light than standard TV. It's not just color depth.
Standard TVs have typical brightness up to 400 nits, while HDR TV brightness should measure in thousands of nits, yet e.g. Sony sells X850D with like 1100 nits and it counts as HDR.
Again, 10-bit and 10-bit HDR are not the same thing:
Non-HDR ultra-HD: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
HDR ultra-HD: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2100 |
Pretty happy with my KS8000 with 1000+ nits peak brightness, even if it isn't full-array local dimming.
I have skipped a lot of movies at the cinema recently just because it doesn't compare to watching the HDR release at home, much more enjoyable. I would rather wait for the HDR release than waste the experience.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 19:41 Post subject: |
|
|
How do you know whether a movie is real HDR?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Waargh
Posts: 6997
Location: hell on earth
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 19:51 Post subject: |
|
|
Totally happy with my LG B7 too
Today I didn't even need to use my AK. I gotta say it was a good day. (c) - Ice Cube
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3E74
Posts: 2559
Location: feels wrong
|
| Posted: Fri, 13th Apr 2018 23:28 Post subject: |
|
|
i just found out and tested with "Staxrip" that i can convert 4k HDR movies to 1080p with the HDR metadata..
And it worked 
I guess im going to make my own 1080p HDR rips, and then enjoying them without the stutter in glorious HDR..
PS...This also works, even if you dont have an HDR Monitor or TV.. who needs one, when u can use MadVR. 
..:: Life - A sexually transmitted disease which always ends in death. There is currently no known cure::..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
