Once and for all: MKV to MP4

[Phish311]

I use Bigasoft Total Video Converter. Very simple process and ive had zero issues. Doesn't take too much time and file size remains about the same

[rgomes]

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.....

[charlien]

My vote is handbrake and identify. Handbrake takes longer but file size is almost half of just running it through subler. In handbrake you can load it up with multiple files and let it run overnight. A 45 minute TV episode is around 800 meg after subler and around 400 meg after handbrake using Apple Universal settings. I realize that file size does have a relation to picture quality but on my 46" TV I am very satisfied with the picture.

[KittyKatta]

Originally Posted by rgomes

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.....

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.

[dynaflash]

Originally Posted by KittyKatta

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.

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.

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

[spacepower7]

Originally Posted by KittyKatta

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.

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

[KittyKatta]

Originally Posted by spacepower7

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

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.

My next rip is Dark Knight in 1080p so it will be interesting how dark lighting, motion and film capture will affect file size.

[rgomes]

Originally Posted by KittyKatta

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"?

[BizProf]

Originally Posted by rgomes

Just wondering why people generally "rip" their Blu-ray collection. Isn't it better to always watch the BD as opposed to a "rip"?

In general, you're absolutely right. I usually reach for the BD when I want the best possible pic/audio quality. At the same time, for much of my content, an HD rip is more than fine, and I enjoy the convenience of flipping through my collection in Plex (my client of choice, currently) -- also nice for the kids or when we have company. This is particularly true when we're undecided on what to watch, and seeing movie art, descriptions, cast/crew, etc. presented together through a slick interface can nudge us in the right direction. Better than staring at a wall of BDs, which reminds me of the old days at the video store (remember those?)...

[spacepower7]

Originally Posted by rgomes

Just wondering why people generally "rip" their Blu-ray collection. Isn't it better to always watch the BD as opposed to a "rip"?

Agree with the above post,and above above, kids and convience are some of the top reasons for rippng blu-ray especially when I am the only one house concerned about picture quality..

As nerdy as we are on this forum, you need to realized that we are in a minority,the story line, cinematography and editing are more important to 99% of the people who watch your rips.

[KittyKatta]

Originally Posted by rgomes

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.

[tbayrgs]

Originally Posted by rgomes

Just wondering why people generally "rip" their Blu-ray collection. Isn't it better to always watch the BD as opposed to a "rip"?

Originally Posted by KittyKatta

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.

^This. Also, can't seem to find the slot to load the blu-ray into my iPad .

To be honest, I don't even own a blu-ray player, only a drive for my Mac. Once upon a time I had a PS3 but just the hassle of fishing out the disk, loading it, waiting for it to start up and dealing with the menu's was annoying enough for me to ditch it and convert them all to digital format ready to watch on any device at a moment's notice.

[SCRMedia]

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?

[mic j]

Originally Posted by SCRMedia

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.

[SCRMedia]

Originally Posted by mic j

Just curious why you don't use Subler's metadata tagger?

Edit: just caught the "automated" part.

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

[chiefpavvy]

Originally Posted by SCRMedia

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...

[SCRMedia]

Originally Posted by chiefpavvy

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...

Hmm how weird - why doesn't iVi remux for me?? :-/

[radiogoober]

Originally Posted by rgomes

Just wondering why people generally "rip" their Blu-ray collection. Isn't it better to always watch the BD as opposed to a "rip"?

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.

[mic j]

Originally Posted by SCRMedia

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

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.

What I would really like is to select a movie and go to a full movie info screen with all metadata and artwork. iTunes does it for their download movies but not for local movies.

----------

Originally Posted by radiogoober

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.

Find the Avatar forced subs file (srt) one of several subtitle download sites. Download the srt. Transcode the Avatar rip using Handbrake and add the srt at that point.

[SCRMedia]

Originally Posted by SCRMedia

Hmm how weird - why doesn't iVi remux for me?? :-/

I didn't have Pass-Thru enabled in preferences and figured that was the reason. But even with that enabled and using a file that again, can be remuxed, iVi attempts to transcode it!

[rgomes]

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?

[SCRMedia]

Originally Posted by rgomes

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?

With regards to your last question, yes you can as thats what I do but use Subler instead of MP4 Tools

[Mavimao]

Originally Posted by rgomes

Still not sure how to tell if a MKV found in the 'wlld' needs to be transcoded or only remuxed? How can you tell?

In MKVtools, if the passthrough option is in red, that means it needs to be re encoded.

[chiefpavvy]

Originally Posted by SCRMedia

I didn't have Pass-Thru enabled in preferences and figured that was the reason. But even with that enabled and using a file that again, can be remuxed, iVi attempts to transcode it!

Image

Image

You are misinterpreting the results. iVI is doing the remux. The "HD Conversion" message shows up during a remux as well...I know, considering how many films I have done. If it says Pass-Thru: YES it will do a remux.

----------

Originally Posted by rgomes

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?

In order for the file to be remuxed, the video must be H.264. Any other format will require a transcode. iVI will tell you. If it says Pass-Thru: YES a remux will be done. Otherwise it will specify NO and say "Not H.264" meaning a complete transcode will be done.

As the vast majority of MKV in the 'wild' are H.264 a remux should almost always be possible. However, be aware of the limitations of the Apple hardware decoder. For example I have remuxed several files fine but ATV2/3 would not play them because of non-standard or extreme H.264 profile options. Like 16 reference frames. You've got to know the boundaries...

[Dhelsdon]

I REALLY like iVI, I purchased it and have used it to convert my .avi's to .mp4
Best part is all the glorious meta-data included.