Worth keeping video_ts folders?

Discussion in 'Apple TV and Home Theater' started by rspeaker, May 11, 2009.

  1. rspeaker macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    #1
    I've been archiving all of my DVDs to video_ts folders; the idea was, I could watch my movies and TV shows whenever I wanted, but could put the disks in storage. However, I ripped a series and put it in iTunes, and decided it was much more convenient having the shows in iTunes than the ts folders.

    I'm using the Universal preset in HB 0.9.3 (bumped to 62% CQ,) and things look pretty good. My only concern is the future. I figure a ripped DVD can only look so good, but could future updates to HB make them look EVEN better, or is this about as good as it will get? If it can't get better, I can get rid of my archives and reclaim a couple terabytes... that would be nice.
     
  2. spinnerlys Guest

    spinnerlys

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Location:
    forlod bygningen
    #2
    As you have still the physical media, it would be safe to assume, that you can rip the videos again some time.

    And for Handbrake: maybe a new codec is released some time in the future, that will compress video more efficiently than today, but that is still in the future.

    The only thing you can do better with encoding your videos: make a 2 pass and have an average bitrate of more than 1500Kbit/s.

    The 2 pass is important, as it scans the image for (sudden) movement and whatever and in the second pass it will use this acquired information to pass it onto the new video file, which in the end will look much better.
    I once did encode Lost with one pass, and whenever the camera pans fast, the picture gets blocky.

    Also the average bitrate means, that you use a Variable BitRate (VBR), whichs stores the info more efficiently. For example a whole black image will take less space than an image with lots of colours and things on it.

    With constant birtrate (CBR) every image, be it just black or a coloured one, will take the same amount of bytes.

    I suppose you're using the .h264 codec?
     
  3. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #3
    Frankly, if I were ripping my DVDs with the intent to rip and store (physically store), I would choose the best ripping option available to me. Sure, there will be newer tech as far as ripping, encoding and viewing (TVs) goes, but overall the best you can do today is the best that can be done.

    If you really own the physical DVD then it should not be much of a worry to you whether or not newer tech will trump what you have. However, the time it takes to rip even 100 DVDs is not time I'd want to give up again anytime soon. Therefore, I would say that unless there is something drastic that changes in tech in my house; ie: my TV is upgraded and we've seen many revisions of ripping software that produces results that surpass anything I've seen before, then yes, I would give that time up if it were that important to me.

    Now, you save some of that time by keeping the video_ts folders. I forget the average size of a video_ts folder before encoding. Mine are all around 4.7 GB (obviously) after encoding. It's up to you how you wish to handle this deal and how important it is for you to have the latest encoding software utilized in your library.
     
  4. MacStew macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    #4
    Transcoding DVDs using Universal 62% CQ will result in movies that look as good as the DVD, so trash the VOBs and reclaim the HDD space.
     
  5. rspeaker thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    #5
    I'm using the Universal preset (which is h.264) bumped to 62%, with detelecine and decomb on. The videos look great on my 17" iMac (1440x900) but I don't have an ATV or HDTV to test the videos on. All my content is SD.

    I do own the movies; the reason for the archive was two-fold: when I move, I can store my physical DVDs in a tote and just bring my HDD with the archives with me, and also for ripping in the future (much easier to set up the queue in HB rather than swap out disks.)

    My video_ts folders are about 7GB to 7.5GB on average; I've got 255 video_ts folders (movies and TV shows) taking up almost 2TB.

    I'm thinking the settings I'm using are the best I can get, and since it is SD content, future HB releases might be able to get the same quality at a smaller file size, but I'm doubting it can actually get a better picture. Thoughts...?
     
  6. eddyg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    #6
    I disagree. What he is doing is better. Since constant quality will assign as many bits as required for the scene at that time (even in single pass).

    Why limit the average for the entire movie to only 1500 when it requires 2000? Maybe because of a lot of panning shots, or it's an art-house movie with lots of grain?

    That's a limitation of using average bitrate, it benefits from two-pass to figure out the average and allocate bits throughout the file to meet that target that *you* arbitrarily set.

    Constant Quality does not require this extra pass, because it is not trying to reach a bitrate target, but a quality target, and so allocates as many bits as it needs to meet that target. You can use rate limiting to prevent excessively high spikes.

    Constant Quality is not Constant Bitrate.

    Both Constant Quality and Average Bitrate are variable bitrate encoding. The only difference is how they decide to allocate the bits, one is based on meeting a user quality target, the other on reaching a user bitrate target.

    Cheers, Ed.
     
  7. eddyg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    #7
    Unless new features come along in the encoder like soft subtitles, chapter thumbnails, DTS pass-through etc.

    Maybe Apple is about to add something cool and you want to add that?
     
  8. wackymacky macrumors 68000

    wackymacky

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Location:
    38°39′20″N 27°13′10″W
    #8
    if you've already ripped them for the time it would take to re-rip wouldn't you be better just buying more storage?

    I'm sure your time is worth more than a new external disk.

    Just put asside the rips in the knowedge that if something happened to the dvds you can reburn them.
     
  9. eddyg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    #9
    Disks add up - eat power - fail - take space - I've got 4 internal and 6 external..

    Personally I delete the TS and will one day rerip - one day - a long time from now - I'm still scarred.

    Cheers, Ed.
     
  10. rspeaker thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    #10
    I think I've come to a conclusion. I would love to be able to keep all the archives, for ease of re-ripping, but I've got 2TB full, and a 2TB WD drive that, if I had an enclosure for it, would easily be filled. I probably need in the neighborhood of 6TB to 8TB to keep all the ts folders.

    For now, I'm going to keep the folders for my TV shows, but the movie backups will all get deleted. And I'll probably kick myself for this when soft subtitles become part of Handbrake.

    Thanks for the input!
     
  11. eddyg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    #11
    You mean they're not already? ;)

    Cheers, Ed.
     
  12. rspeaker thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    #12
    I know you're active with HB stuff, so you probably know more than I do. I'm a simpleton, though, so if it's part of the CLI, I won't understand it, and if I need a program to rip subtitles, another to add it to my movies, etc... it would be nice but not worth the hassle.

    I look for one-step solutions, and I am so... thankful for the HB devs that I don't dare voice complaints over a missing feature (which sounds like it might be somewhat difficult to code for and incorporate anyhow.)

    Thanks for your hard work.
     

Share This Page