Thread 106322158

I have a bunch of DVDs, Blue Rays and such. I want to rip them and encode in a smaller size. DVDs and not such a big deal, but Blue Rays take up an obscene amount of hard drive space. I noticed that they use x264, which is compatible, but not terribly efficient. I don't care about compatibility. I want to encode them into something liver x265/x266 or AV1 to take the least amount of space while being virtually indistinguishable in quality to the naked eye on a big TV screen. What would be the best approach, which codec to choose and which settings? In a perfect world I'd hope to save 70% of space, but even 20% would be good.

>>106322158 (OP)
ffmpeg -i video.mp4 -c:v libaom-av1 video.mkv

That's all you need.

If it takes too long, use libsvtav1.

>>106322158 (OP)
Try something like webm related. IMHO AV1 is going to be the next x264. Especially because it literally achieves x265 compression efficiency at x264 encode speed which is kinda nuts when you think about it.

>>106322190
what about -crf, row-mt, keyframe placement, etc.?

Compressing a bluray takes ages, save yourself some time and effort and just torrent the movies

>>106322230
>asks babby's first day question about encoding
>suddenly talks about row-mf and keyframes
yep, fucking liar, not doing your homework

>>106322158 (OP)
>>106322230
Ask gpt

>>106322322
I'm preparing for a real possibility of my country's Internet becoming a semi-closed and very controlled network like China or North Korea. I don't mind leaving my PC on overnight or while I am away. Also, I probably will be moving to leave in a remote rural area at some point in my life.
>>106322334
The fact that I am even AWARE of something like x265 or AV1 doesn't imply "baby's first steps". I am overwhelmed by the amount of encoding parameters and shit that has to be taken into account.
>>106322338
Y'all bots and Jews anyway, what's the difference?

>>106322158 (OP)
In what world is x264 not efficient? It's fast as fuck compared to x265/AV1.

>>106322446
x262 is even faster
if the speed of decoding is absolute priority, then I can just turn my Blue Rays into 500 gigabyte files that will play on my Pentium 3. But the goal is to reduce file size with more efficient encoding while preserving quality. That's what I refer to when I say "efficient".

>noobs are mixing up H.26* and x26* again
One is a codec, the other a coder.

>>106322523
:nerd:

>>106322494
You're not really going to get much of a worthwhile size reduction (for the given encode time over x264) using x265 when you're encoding at best, 1080p AVC video. You do you though.

>>106322158 (OP)
SVT-AV1 (SvtAv1EncApp):
--crf 32 to 38 --enable-variance-boost 1 --tune 1 --aq-mode 2 --enable-tf 0 --tile-columns 1 --tile-rows 0

before doing anything check primaries, matrix coefficients and transfer characteristics, if it's encoded with bt601 colorspace add this (SvtAv1EncApp): --color-primaries 6 --transfer-characteristics 13 --matrix-coefficients 6

for hdr use libplacebo tonemapping with high quality preset like this (ffmpeg): -vf libplacebo=color_primaries=bt709:color_trc=bt709:colorspace=bt709:extra_opts=preset=high_quality

i use pipes to connect SVT-AV1 to ffmpeg but if you'd rather use ffmpeg directly, encoding parameters not available through the wrapper like the variance-boost stuff can be passed using (ffmpeg): -svtav1-params option1=arg:option2=arg

>>106322793
can you explain why you chose these specific parameters?

>>106323522
>crf 32 to 38
this range has good size/quality balance, depends on the content but generally with animation go low and with live action go high
>enable-variance-boost + aq-mode 2
with these I'm trying to preserve detail while still favoring compression
>tune 1
it's now the superior tune in SVT according to benchmarking done by Trix https://wiki.x266.mov/blog/svt-av1-fourth-deep-dive-p2 and I confirmed this with my own tests
>enable-tf 0
temporal filtering introduces artifacts sometimes and is never good if you value fidelity. there's an auto mode (2) that only enables it when needed but I prefer to completely disable it just to be sure it doesn't fuck things up
>--tile-columns 1 --tile-rows 0
significantly increases decoding speed at nearly no compression efficiency cost. dav1d is a beast of a decoder but this makes sure even a potato can decode your video

>>106322158 (OP)
Just start by deleting popular or relatively popular things you already watched, since you can always (re-)download them again later if needed. And rare(ish) content deserve to be preserved in their OG quality.
Mass re-encodes for smaller size is a retarded pursuit. No one "totally absolutely 100%" needs terabytes of mostly already watched 300MiB sized movie slob. or whatever it is you watch, stuck forever their your disks.

>>106322158 (OP)
>>106322190
don't use av1. wait for av2, it'll fix the problems of av1 this time for sure

>>106322158 (OP)
Waste of fucking time.

buy a new HDD.

>>106323883
are there any specific options for movie grain, animation, etc.?

>>106322793
Does this fix banding in dark scenes? My main issue with everything newer than H264 has been dark scenes having very visible, blocky gradients.

>>106324146
brought to you by the "buy a new SSD to play our 150 gigs video game that looks marginally better than a game from 2015" gang

>>106322158 (OP)
Buy bigger hard drives. At roughly 50GB each you could fit 240 BD ISOs on a 12TB drive. Reencoding lossy versions should be for portable use, not to supplant your original; that's how you end up with only shitty 64kb/s MP3 rips being the only existing record of rare bitrotted CDs.
I have a bunch of huge VHS and LD captures but I would never permanently delete the original capture files (maybe lossless compression like FLAC or 7zip at best). Likewise with 6K ProRes files of 16mm/35mm film after cleaning up and reencoding them into something presentable, even if some of them take up a whole terabyte per reel.

>>106324157
>are there any specific options for movie grain
adding more grain or just retaining the already present grain?
>animation
SVT-AV1 does great in animation with those settings

>>106324161
luminance-qp-bias, I have never encountered that issue but that's specifically what that option is for

>>106324179
Ironically video games are one of the best candidates for compression, and for storing them there's no reason not to compress them since they can be uncompressed into their natural state. Compressing audio and video is a waste of time since you're just permanently destroying it effectively. It's already compressed once to fit on the disc anyway, so yes, get a bigger hard drive

>>106322158 (OP)
it's faster to just pirate what you have, although it will likely be x264.

>>106322158 (OP)
You know, I remember reading somewhere that a bunch of people who were ripping their huge BR libraries did some math and concluded that it was cheaper to buy more storage (HDDs) to store their original rips than it was to spend the electricity required to re-encode all their huge files.

I don't know how true it is, but video encoding can indeed take a huge amount of time and a lot of processing power, so it's probably worth looking into to figure out if encoding your shit is actually in any way cheaper than just buying more HDDs.

>>106324357
>adding more grain or just retaining the already present grain?
to retain, I've come across a Youtube video suggesting the use of film-grain-denoise=0:film-grain=20 option, but as far as I understand it just draws new grain
>>106324357
>luminance-qp-bias, I have never encountered that issue but that's specifically what that option is for
is it worth slapping on just in case every time?

>>106322322
It used to but now we have AV1. The thing achieves amazing compression and speed on a FFFUCKING TELEPHONE, see my webm >>106322214

That's a Galaxy S8. Remember that phones have about 10% the CPU performance of computers so we're dealing with very small amounts of CPU resources here.

>>106324731
>to retain
if this becomes an issue the easiest method to try lowering the CRF and passing qp-scale-compress-strength [2-3] as needed until it looks good and there's no temporal artifacts.

>film-grain-denoise=0:film-grain=20 option, but as far as I understand it just draws new grain
correct

there are more grain retention options coming but they're still under development in the "PSY" forks. you can build one of the forks and try the new options out if the above doesn't work for you, I personally use SVT-AV1-HDR by Julio Barba who is a mainline SVT-AV1 contributor but be aware this rabbithole goes DEEP and testing all those new knobs and switches can be overwhelming, better to keep it simple for now

>is it worth slapping (luminance-qp-bias) on just in case every time?
no, this should only be used as needed otherwise it will bloat your encodes without any benefit

>>106322158 (OP)
don't reencode them. remux them into mkv and leave it at that.
https://mkvtoolnix.org/

do not waste two months fucking with ffmpeg.

>>106325091
To what end? I am not retarded enough to store Blue Rays as fucking ISOs. It's still a huge ass file. 130 gigs for one season of TV I watch every years or two? Fuck no.

>>106325120
ffmpeg -i {} -c:v libx264 -crf 24 -tune grain -preset slow -c:a libfdk_aac -vbr 5 -f mp4 {}.mp4

>>106322158 (OP)
Are we talking actual real physical discs or pirated rips made by someone else?
Cause if you're looking to rip your own discs, I'll have you know it's not worth it. Bluray and especially DVDs are a much more loose standard than you'd think, and so there's no true one-click solutions available meaning you'll either end up ripping an incomplete collection or you'll be spending hours figuring out why the fuck someone would make a bluray in anamorphic widescreen or trying to rip a DVD that plays the chapters out of order.
If you're pirating anyways, just download a smaller rip made by someone else.

>>106322158 (OP)
>personal media library
buy another hdd. a 14TB hdd costs like $130, and that's like 350 bluray remuxes worth of space. no quality loss, no spending days encoding new files
if you must make them smaller, then just download torrents of smaller copies. it'll take less time and if you do a little research you can download from groups who know more about video encoding than you do
i mean no offense, but this kind of question comes up often enough and it's usually not the best option. asking for "the best quality at the smallest size and is as quick to do" is asking for all three of something that you can only optimise for two of, trying to do all three just compromises all of them

>>106325210
>"the best quality at the smallest size and is as quick to do"
who said anything about quick? I am willing to put in time

>>106325230
oh trust me, if it's enough discs that you don't think you can store them on your hdd's, you will very quickly be looking for ways to speed it up. if you're optimising for compression efficiency, your encodes will slow down real fast
then again, i don't know your situation, if you're good with letting a computer burn electricity for weeks then go nuts

>>106325120
>To what end?
You tell us. What are you going to do with the original discs after ripping and re-encoding them, bin them? If you're only going to be watching on "a big TV screen", why not buy a UHD Blu-Ray player and be done with it?

>>106322158 (OP)
Buy another hard-drive.

>>106322158 (OP)
https://github.com/alexheretic/ab-av1

>>106325381
https://github.com/rust-av/Av1an

>>106325445
abandonware

>>106322158 (OP)
ripping and encoding everything would just be a retarded waste of time/electricity/compute
just snatch existing 265/av1 encodes. in the case that there aren't any, encode remuxes or downloaded bdrips

CRF 32
resize to 720p
add whatever sharpen shit ffmpeg has
you won't even know the difference
KEK

>>106324795
>what is hardware decoding
you should shut the fuck up if you don't know what you're talking about, honestly

>>106325536
this, also if he downloads most popular torrent he won't even have to waste time for compressing those blurays

>>106325922
Dogshit, that's what GPU video encoding is.

There is exactly 0 benefit when libsvtav1 will encode at 100+ FPS on preset 8 on a fucking TELEPHONE.

>>106325932
I am preparing for a scenario when I won't be able to access Internet or my ability to use something like torrents will be severely crippled.
Let me repeat: I want to gradually build an offline media library that will retain maximum human perceivable quality compared to the source while taking less space than a source. I am willing to put in time for that. Offline media library means I will be able to access it while I don't have Internet access. As for storage, I prefer to have be able to have redundant copies/RAID storage, and in this cast HDD cost adds up.

>>106325973
speed is not a problem with H264

>>106326082
This sounds like some infantile autistic fantasy, like when in middle school you dreamr about stopping time and having sex with all the cute girls and becoming rich

Download the fucking blue ray h264 or h265 rip, store it somewhere and be done with it ffs

>YOU LITERALLY CANT SEE THE DIFFERENCE!!!!1!1111 I LOVE DESTRUCTIVE COMPRESSION!!!!
Encoding niggers are worse than audiophools

>>106326507
>This sounds like some infantile autistic fantasy
Welcome to 4chan, I'll be your guide.
But honestly, Internet regulation is worse every month. Half the country now uses VPN for basic Internet stuff because it's blocked or rate limited here. The possibility of torrents being blocked is very real. A few major torrent sites are blocked already, I expect the protocol itself to be DPIed any day now.

>>106322446
>In what world is x264 not efficient? It's fast as fuck compared to x265/AV1.
You clearly have no idea what you're writing about. Stop repeating phrases you don't understand.


SVTAV1 is faster than h264 on hardware without acceleration.

>>106322158 (OP)
What is YIFY command line to encode their videos?

>>106326552
>Half the country now uses VPN for basic Internet stuff
Why don't you then. If Britbong ISPs block torrent sites, with a VPN it makes no difference to you. Mullvad is like £48 for a year

>>106322793
> Recommended SVTAV1 right from the start, not as an alternative to libaom
Terrible recommendation. You're clearly stupid, but you know how to present your stupid idea well, which is why the OP bought it.

> --crf 32 to 38
Literally the standard CRF (32)
Increasing it causes an unbalanced loss of quality vs. file size reduction.

>--enable-*-boost
Great, as if SVT wasn't enough, as if recommending a high CRF wasn't enough, we also have another hack that will make a terrible trade-off between quality and file size just to gain 1 more fps during encoding.

>--tile-columns 1 --tile-rows 0
At this point, why not use rmvb once and for all?

>>106328881
>Obliterate fine detail with hq3dn
>jack up the bitrate for 25% of the video
>bitstarve it for the rest
You're welcome.

>>106329684
strange, I don't see a command line, so you must not know dick

what's with the influx of trolls on /g/ lately?
this >>106329232
the anti graphene retard
the anti mpv spam
the e celeb spam
the child porn spam at every fucking hour

what the fuck is going on on this website these past couple of weeks?

>>106329754
There's really no other explanation in how they punk so many people into accepting quality so bad it barely looks OKAY-ish on a phone screen. It doesn't have to be this way btw, they could switch to AV1 and it wouldn't even take longer to encode.

In fact I just found out encoding AV1 video is jow faster than encoding H264 video but you know with a massive compression efficiency gain and whatnot.

You can visit my little blog post if it interests you: 106327782

>>106329754
There's really no other explanation in how they punk so many people into accepting quality so bad it barely looks OKAY-ish on a phone screen. It doesn't have to be this way btw, they could switch to AV1 and it wouldn't even take longer to encode.

In fact I just found out encoding AV1 video is jow faster than encoding H264 video but you know with a massive compression efficiency gain and whatnot.

You can visit my little blog post if it interests you: >>106327782

>>106329794
>what the fuck is going on on this website these past couple of weeks?
China.

>>106324122
What problems?

I dont know if this is the right thread to ask but what sites can i use to download youtube videos?
I used to use https://cobalt.tools/ but it now no longer accepts youtube links.

>>106322158 (OP)
Great thread, OP & to the anons filled with knowledge that are sharing it freely. <3
>>106332243
https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp

>>106332304
Yeah, feel like a retard now. Its a simple as running cmd and putting the link in goddamn.

>>106332419
Don't sell yourself or it short. You had no need to look for an alternative until now. It is also incredibly powerful, so be sure to read the friendly manual : https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp?tab=readme-ov-file#usage-and-options
There is often a thread dedicated to usage alongside other programs for playing videos acquired with it, similar to this discussions topic. Look for yt-dlp mpv(vlc) ffmpeg threads. You can learn lots of neat tricks using it and ffmpeg there, for sure.

>>106325973
Isn't libsvtav1 shit looking compared to aom though?

>>106326082
Why not get it by torrents instead of ripping yourself though? You'll save money if you'd have to be buying more for what you want to save, and the torrent uploads are usually encoded with settings that get very good quality for size but are a pain in the ass in terms of time on a consumer cpu, you'll probably get better results than encoding yourself. Most stuff has h265 torrents already so size won't be an issue

>>106322214
>IMHO AV1 is going to be the next x264
kek.
You're still delusional.
That's what you said about HEVC/VP9

>>106322158 (OP)
>What would be the best approach
Use this
https://github.com/automatic-ripping-machine/automatic-ripping-machine

remember:
HEVC is superior to av1. The problem is all this open source shit people talk about.

So much work, still incomplete. How can they compete with x266?

>>106325091
the goal is to save space, much more than you can by remuxing to mkv

>>106333109
svt.mp4
1.8 MB
https://files.catbox.moe/1xire8.mp4
hevc.mp4
2.8 MB
https://files.catbox.moe/4pg19q.mp4
h264.mp4
6.4 MB
https://files.catbox.moe/fnhbhx.mp4
vvc.mp4
0.9 MB
https://files.catbox.moe/k0nw0k.mp4

>>106333434
ama be real widy'all
h264 is king

>>106333434
This thing about av1 changing color kills me. I've had a lot of problems with it trying to convert a texture to avif.

my thing is re-encoding porn shit in x265 10 bit at 1500kbit/s at the slowest preset. data hoarding / transcoding is so fun!!!

>>106333706
>my """thing"""
>show oldest file from 2 days ago

>>106333775
that's not the whole list lol

>>106333896
talk is cheap, show screenshot

>>106333924
this is one of my oldest on that laptop idk what is getting you upset are you gatekeeping it lmao

>>106322158 (OP)
physical media with redundant copies
for ease of use SD and iphone \ cloud drives

>>106335474
sounds like something i might do