Formally known as: Handbrake...Is there such a thing as this?

cwazytech said:

I'll give it a try, but as I stated before, I've use an RF value of 18 for a while now and had normal file sizes. I'll give this suggestion a try and let you know. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Let me know, because I use RF 20 and if you go down to 20 and get 2-3GB files, then I have to figure out why, at RF 20, mine are 5-10GB.

cwazytech said:

The resultant file ended up being 4.5gigs. Better, but not great. Any suggestions on how to reach better results without losing quality? My usual results are around 2.35 gigs. I'd accept 3gigs. Or am I reaching for the stars? Thanks again Dynaflash.

Click to expand...

Okay look, I don't think you completely understand what is happening here. As you have been told, Constant Quality encoding maintains a given perceptive visual quality (represented by a "rf factor"), Bitrate (therefore file size) be damned. Many things can cause the file size to ballon etc. Obviously length of movie makes a difference, as well the"complexity" of the movie makes a *huge* difference. For instance, Saving Private Ryan has a huge amount of fast action along with a ton of film grain. HB will throw a ton of bitrate at it to maintain proper visual quality. The same length film done with *clean* cgi animation say ... will use very little bitrate for the same visual quality. Therefore results will vary from source to source as far as bitrate and therefore file size.

Another thing to realize is that all 1080p does *not* have the same pixel count. The width is 1920 but in your log you have here your veritical pixel count is a full 1080. Which means again more bitrate for the visual source. Due to cropping and depending on the films Aspect Ratio you may have "1080p" sources that aren't nearly as large pixel wise from a vertical perspective, less pixels == less bitrate == less file size for the exact same content.

The results you are getting seem in line with what to expect given your source size. Once again it *will* vary from source to source with the same preset. That is the whole idea.

Yes, you *could* go to some more extreme x264 options however you imo are chasing a ghost. For one thing you need to maintain atv 3 device capability and as well, have your encodes take a reasonable amount of time. There is an old saying in video encoding ... "Speed, Quality, Size ... Pick Two". Of course it does not include device compatibility which also comes into play. Point is you are getting results size wise that I very much think are inline with what you can reasonably expect.

cwazytech said:

Unless it's a huge inconvenience, can someone explain the settings the arrow is pointing to in the photo(x264 Preset; x264 Tune; h264 Profile; h264 Level)?

Click to expand...

With all due respect, this is waaaay beyond the scope of this thread imo. I guess I have no idea what you are objecting to with the atv 3 preset I wrote which provides a good balance imo. If you want to "roll your own" thats up to you. Otherwise frankly for that much info google is your friend and take your chances. Not trying to be mean, but you are asking an awful lot imo.

simsaladimbamba said:

You already have a highly compressed source, why not try using another tool, that does not involve transcoding, but only rewraps from an .MKV container to an .MP4/.M4V container, like ... MKVToolnix

Click to expand...

MKVToolnix can't remux per se. (It's a great MKV track editor / splitter, though.)

Menneisyys2 said:

MKVToolnix can't remux per se. (It's a great MKV track editor / splitter, though.)

Click to expand...

Thanks for the correction. I once remuxed an MKV to an .mp4 with an application, and thought it was this one, Probably was another one then. Tired.

We've already explained to you in detail everything you need to know, but you seem to be deaf to what we've told you. Short version: You can't get a high quality end result sub-3GB file, with a 1080p grainy 2+ hour source.

cwazytech said:

I think you should re-read my posts. I'll break this down. It's a 54min(Not 2+ hour or 2 hour. Not even 1.5 hours) 1080 program that used to encode to a file size of 2.40 gig file under the ATV3 preset. Only change is that I slid the RF slider down to 18. Since upgrading to the latest Nightly, the same preset now encodes the same file(again, less than one hour) to 6.37gigs.

Click to expand...

My apologies. I reread your posts, and you did mention the runtime length previously. Had you replied directly to my comments afterwards regarding the runtime length, we could have avoided that confusion, but I'll take responsibility for that. My other comments still stand that grainy live-action film sources will have have larger filesizes for comparable PQ compared to cleaner sources. Did you try my other suggestion about tweaking the RF value and converting just a few minutes of the timeframe where you saw your initial picture quality issue? So if the ATV3 preset is RF20 and you get large file sizes but with good quality, try changing the value to RF22 and recording that problematic segment and see if you're happy with the end result.

cwazytech said:

I did recode it without tweaking the RF value(leaving it at 20). The end result dropped to 4.84gigs. I'm weary about raising the RF value higher than 20. I've been following suggestions from Dynaflash for a long time now and I get into this safety bubble where when I reach a certain level of good quality(like lowering the RF value to 19, or 18 even) I think raising it is like going backwards.
On a side note, I think the sudden raise in file size has something to do with the "maxrate" or "bufsize" values in the h264 Levels. But since I can't retrieve my previous version of Handbrake, I have know way of confirming if that's it. I also don't really know what they mean, and what lowering them does to the final product. I've searched through the Handbrake forums, but I can't seem to find answers there.

Click to expand...

If you were following Dynaflash's suggestions, you would be using RF 20 not 18. The other thing you just don't seem to want to accept is that you are alone in seeing this file size increase shifting from the stable version to the nightly version. That would point to the source of the issue being with you instead of the source being the nightly version.

cwazytech said:

I shall clarify. I chose to use an RF of 18 based on a post from a long time ago where he did suggest using an RF of 19. So that was my choice.



I didn't go from a stable version to a nightly version. I went from an early Nightly version to the most current Nightly version. That early nightly version was shortly after the ATV3 preset was introduced. I used the same RF number then as I do now, and my files have more than doubled in size. My only theory as to why I may be the only one who is experiencing this sudden change in file size is because it's been awhile since I upgraded. I'm assuming something has changed in the ATV3 preset from when it was first introduced to today's version. Maybe the change happened a long time ago. I don't know. I do know that before the ATV3 preset became available, Dynaflash suggested tweaks that could be made in the ATV2 preset to reach ATV3 quality. I have a feeling a lot has changed since then. But then again, what do I know.

----------



I'd also like to reiterate a comment I made in post #40. Is it possible the default values have changed since the ATV3 preset was introduced?

Click to expand...

It is possible, it might even be likely. But I have been using the pre-atv3 preset (as outlined by Dynaflash), the aTV3 preset at introduction, and now, the nightly (as of last week) with the aTV3 preset and I have not experienced any noticeable change in file size. All approx. 2hr BR movies are 5-10GB.

cwazytech said:

I shall clarify. I chose to use an RF of 18 based on a post from a long time ago where he did suggest using an RF of 19. So that was my choice.

Click to expand...

I would have made that suggestion for dvd sources. Unless I had an "out of body experience" I would not have suggested using it for a blu ray source. In fact I don't even use 20, I use 22 for my own stuff.

cwazytech said:

I'm assuming something has changed in the ATV3 preset from when it was first introduced to today's version.
I'd also like to reiterate a comment I made in post #40. Is it possible the default values have changed since the ATV3 preset was introduced?

Click to expand...

Okay all presets are using the x264 presets instead of the advanced panel we are all used to. There are a lot of reasons for this however, it should be noted that the advanced panel we are used to just uses individual options (as specified by that long string in the advanced panel) Basically they are like shortcuts. Now in changing the built ins to use the x264 presets we just converted the old string to so it turns out the same. Is it possible there is some slight difference? Yes. However *nothing* that would show what you are complaining about. I am going to suggest the difference is more the source.

Here is what you need to do to prove your theory. Get a source you encoded using your "older" nightly. Presuming you did encode it using the atv preset ... reencode it again using the new nightly and the same preset. Then compare. Has to be the exact same source. No difference as each source can swing the bitrate etc wildly. Then post your finding as well as the activity log for each on pastebin.com (frankly to verify you in fact used the same settings). Remember, HB stores encode logs from each encode you every do so you can retrieve the original from your first encode.

Beyond that test, there is little really to add since you are doing different sources so any comparison is a moot point tbh.

Additionally Edit: vbv opts put a "cap" on bitrate. so if anything given your insistent use of rf 18 my guess is you are getting capped by vbv. which means if anything its a lower bitrate than if no vbv settings. In fact its possible you are ending up with a constant bitrate by and large. If you ramp up the quality the way you are its being a bit jacked by the vbv settings.

Changing things without a full understanding of the repercussions can result in unexpected results. No offense meant in any way , shape or form but just as an fyi.

Built in presets are crafted to work together for the best results within reason for the most folks. We really don't ( contrary to popular belief ) throw a dart at a dartboard.

cwazytech said:

Well, I can't seem to access my logs back that far.

Click to expand...

They are kept forever unless you manually erased them.

https://trac.handbrake.fr/wiki/ActivityLog

The Individual Encode Activity Log File

Starting with HandBrake 0.9.3, the HandBrake MacGui also records everything from the beginning of each encode to the end to a text file found in ~/Library/Application Support/HandBrake/EncodeLogs/ by default. There is an advanced preference you can set to send each encode log to the same directory as your ouput movie file for easy analysis.

Important Note: starting with OS X 10.7 "Lion", the ~/Library/ directory is hidden and can't be accessed using regular Finder navigation. You can open the folder directly from the Activity Window (see above), or use the Finder's Go > Go to Folder… menu item (setting it to ~/Library/Application Support/HandBrake/).

Click to expand...

cwazytech said:

The best I can do is tell you that I used the ATV3 preset in Nightly version 4190svn and slid the RF value to 18.

Click to expand...

Er, you mean this svn 4190 from a year and a half ago ?

https://trac.handbrake.fr/changeset/4190

----------

I find it *very* hard to believe you used the AppleTV 3 preset in 4190 since I did not put it in HandBrake until much later in this svn commit:

https://trac.handbrake.fr/changeset/4784

which was about 7 months ago. There is no way you used that nightly from 4190 since the AppleTV 3 did not exist at that time.

You seem to be off by oh, about a year.

Well, did you erase your activity logs ? If not you can retrieve these if you really want to find out what the issue is. Otherwise, not much to say.