I need to learn this stuff too. I know im converting rather than remuxing but On my first few BR rips using Handbrake and the AppleTV2 720 preset then my file sizes are all over the place.Okay so just reporting on some testing that I did -- iFlicks Vs MP4 Tools.
Original MKV file was 3.5GB (AVC Codec)
I tried encoding with iFlicks (Pass Thru) and it took 28 minutes. Final Size: 1.4 GB
I tried encoding with MP4 Tools (Pass Thru) and it took 14 minutes: Final Size: 3.15 GB
Why different file sizes?
I thought they were both doing the same thing: remuxing?
Man I need to go to school to learn all this stuff.....
You are using Constant Quality encoding. HB will keep the same visual quality and adjust bitrate accordingly. Older movies that are grainy or very complex action will require more bitrate. Still dark scenes require very little, this is quite normal and really the correct way to encode over abr if quality is your concern.I'm just not getting why an older movie like Back to the Future would be so huge while some newer action movies are 2GB smaller.
I need to learn this stuff too. I know im converting rather than remuxing but On my first few BR rips using Handbrake and the AppleTV2 720 preset then my file sizes are all over the place.
Beauty and the Beast - 2.2GB
Tangled - 1.99GB
Inception - 2.55GB
MI4 - 2.9GB
Back to the Future - 4.7GB
Hop - 3.5GB
I'm just not getting why an older movie like Back to the Future would be so huge while some newer action movies are 2GB smaller.
So newer movies shot digitally or with less grain will have a more efficient transfer than older movies. That makes sense. Animated definitely are quick because I did Lion King and it took 90min and made a 1.55GB 720p file that looks fantastic.The complexity of the original source, ie camera movement/action, and image quality.
In a very simple example:
Think of a movie scene with two people sitting at a table, having a conversation. If the camera is sitting still on a tripod and not panning, the the only movement in the scene is the people, and maybe their movement affecting the lighting on the table or wall.
Think of the same scene, but now a handheld camera moving a little bit. In this example, the position ofthe people, the table, the lighting are all constantly changing, therefore this scene requires much more data to record ie bigger file size.
Another issue is the original picture quality. I have old home Super8 film movies transferred to DVD. One hour of this footage in standard def takes about 2.5 GB because handbrake has to try to preserve all of the film grain so that the video looks truer to the original, and not blurry.
Most of the newer movies and animation have little or no film grain bc they are shot on digital, created digitally, or restored digitally removing film grain.
I would speculate the Back to the Future file has film grain, or it's just Michael J. Fox is so cool that he needs bigger files
My next rip is Dark Knight in 1080p so it will be interesting how dark lighting, motion and film capture will affect file size.
Just wondering why people generally "rip" their Blu-ray collection. Isn't it better to always watch the BD as opposed to a "rip"?
Just wondering why people generally "rip" their Blu-ray collection. Isn't it better to always watch the BD as opposed to a "rip"?
Isn't it for the same reason people use Netflix? People don't love Netflix because of their video quality or even their movie selection. They subscribe because it brings a convenience that prevents us from watching a rerun of National Treasure on cable the 20th time.Just wondering why people generally "rip" their Blu-ray collection. Isn't it better to always watch the BD as opposed to a "rip"?
Just wondering why people generally "rip" their Blu-ray collection. Isn't it better to always watch the BD as opposed to a "rip"?
Isn't it for the same reason people use Netflix? People don't love Netflix because of their video quality or even their movie selection. They subscribe because it brings a convenience that prevents us from watching a rerun of National Treasure on cable the 20th time.
Ripping your own BluRays only increases your selection and gives you pretty amazing quality, gives you more versatility (ATV, iPhone, iPad, Laptop), gives quick access to repeated movies (kids movies), is easier to access and takes less space (my movies can go in a box rather than take up an entire wall).
I'm sure some of the videophiles who have that eye for spotting pixels would prefer the original BD, but I'd bet that most of us could be fooled by a 1080p bluray rip on the AppleTV. I know I can.
I currently use Subler to remux my video files then use iVi to add the metadata before dragging and dropping into iTunes.
Ideally, I'd like to use just one program and have it automated. I read that iVi / iFlicks can also remux files but whenever I try that with a video file which Subler will remux just fine, iVi / iFlicks attempt to transcode the video which takes a much longer time.
Am I correct in thinking that iVi / iFlicks should be able to remux H264 video? And if thats the case, how can I get them to do that?
Just curious why you don't use Subler's metadata tagger?
Edit: just caught the "automated" part.
I currently use Subler to remux my video files then use iVi to add the metadata before dragging and dropping into iTunes.
Ideally, I'd like to use just one program and have it automated. I read that iVi / iFlicks can also remux files but whenever I try that with a video file which Subler will remux just fine, iVi / iFlicks attempt to transcode the video which takes a much longer time.
Am I correct in thinking that iVi / iFlicks should be able to remux H264 video? And if thats the case, how can I get them to do that?
I do the opposite, remux with iVI Pro and then add chapter video/optimize/tag with Subler afterwards.
iVI does indeed remux and does a great job. Even on my rather slow MacBook it typically does a film in 15-20 minutes from start to finish...
Just wondering why people generally "rip" their Blu-ray collection. Isn't it better to always watch the BD as opposed to a "rip"?
One of my main gripes about the aTV movie display is that it truncates the description and actors fields if they are too long. Also, from my "happy wife, happy life" perspective, my wife quickly passes over any movie with a long description. So short movie descriptions are key to her. For those reasons, I use Subler for metadata tagging. I can eliminate various fields I am not interested in. I don't need director, producer, 20 actors, etc. Eliminating those fields allows the aTV to expand the movie description field so I don't get the "...". And it's the full movie description that I really want to show up on the aTV. I have not experienced the slow metadata search and load, you have experienced. But in the end, it all comes down to personal needs and workflow.To be honest, I'd just settle for one program to handle the remuxing / tagging at this stage. The tagger in Subler is clunky - I like the way iVi just adds everything in, artwork include within about 3 seconds of dragging the file into the program.
With Subler, you have to click the search, choose the artwork (which takes ages to load for some reason!) etc. I'm just being lazy and trying to make the whole process as streamlined as possible haha
Its for convenience. I'd much rather scroll through a list and hit "play" then switch tv inputs, wait the 2 minutes for my BR player to turn on, boot up, then be forced to sit through a clunky BR menu and forced previews, a notice telling me to not steal (after I've already bought the BR disc!), etc.
I keep the two Batmans and Avatar discs, in the rare circumstance I want to watch those, because, well, the IMAX scenes in Dark Knight are so damn cool, and I can't figure out how to rip the subtitles for Avatar.
Hmm how weird - why doesn't iVi remux for me?? :-/
I tried iVI and found the same problem -- it always wants to transcode instead of remuxing. I did have the Pass-Thru option enabled. I ended up sticking with MP4 Tools. $4.99 to register it and it works like a charm. Remuxes when it can, and transcodes when it has to. Tagging is not the greatest though.
Still not sure how to tell if a MKV found in the 'wlld' needs to be transcoded or only remuxed? How can you tell?
PS - Can I remux in MP4 Tools and then tag in iVI?
Still not sure how to tell if a MKV found in the 'wlld' needs to be transcoded or only remuxed? How can you tell?
I tried iVI and found the same problem -- it always wants to transcode instead of remuxing. I did have the Pass-Thru option enabled. I ended up sticking with MP4 Tools. $4.99 to register it and it works like a charm. Remuxes when it can, and transcodes when it has to. Tagging is not the greatest though.
Still not sure how to tell if a MKV found in the 'wlld' needs to be transcoded or only remuxed? How can you tell?
PS - Can I remux in MP4 Tools and then tag in iVI?