Encoder profile handbrake blu ray7/29/2023 ![]() Matt Gadient on Jclick here to reply Jeremy: And if you’re new to encoding with Handbrake, hopefully this has helped you to get a better understanding of the Constant Quality setting and the effects of various RF values. Dropping the RF value by 2 saves under 20MB (9-12%), and the video is noticeably worse.Īll that said, be sure to draw your own conclusions. You really start to lose a lot of quality for each bit of filesize you try saving. It’s a matter of how much you can tolerate at this point. RF26-32 is where noticeable degradation comes about.You save under 40MB (19%) by dropping from RF22 to RF24 here. RF22-24 is about the point where visual differences are starting to become noticeable, but typically not to the point where they’d stand out when you’re actually watching.The reductions in file size here tend to be substantial though, almost 100MB smaller (28% savings) by going from RF18 to RF20. RF18-20 are incredibly close in the images, and it’s pretty hard to tell the difference when it comes to watching the video.At that point, you’re probably better off keeping your original source rather than trying to recode it. RF10 looks almost identical to RF0 in the images, but still results in a massive file size – quite possibly similar to the size of your source.Note that these sizes ONLY apply to this episode of this source :Ī few things you probably observed when comparing to RF:0 (the lossless version): Now that you hopefully have an idea as to how each of the videos look, let’s see what each weighed in at for the full 43m8s episode. Note that YouTube re-compresses videos – I kept it at full-quality as long as I could, but I suspect YouTube won’t be fine with serving up a 360MB video that only lasts 35 seconds, so we’re at the mercy of their encoder. ![]() Note that you must click the appropriate buttons to watch this at full-screen 1080p if you want to see the differences somewhat clearly. Of course, this only goes so far – once the RF value is high enough, there’s no saving Jack’s facial features from the effects of compression!įor those interested, I’ve also got another page on this site that lets you compare x264 vs x265 vs VP8 vs VP9 (at various RF and bitrate settings).Ī static image isn’t always great, so here’s the 35-second video I made showcasing the difference between these RF settings in “24”. Worth noting that x264’s psychovisual enhancements (trellis, etc) do a pretty good job of keeping detail where you’d notice it (the face), at the expense of the stuff you normally wouldn’t notice while watching (like those background areas). Note that the first one (RF0) is for reference (lossless). Pictures should work for nearly everyone. There’s a video below too, but it comes with a bit of a caveat so might not show everything well for you. I’ll start with a few screenshots at different RF values. I tested the following RF values (listed in Handbrake under “Constant Quality”:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |