HandBrake

Pick a preset appropriate for your playback environment, and then a reasonable quality value (or try a few and see if you can see the difference).

Absolutely no sense in a source codec/output codec specific guide. The codecs tell you nothing.

No, I mean choose the option to update the built in presets.

HB isn't seeing detecting the border, but you can manually adjust cropping to remove it.

Update your presets.

OstinatoFreak wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:48 am

To be clear, this is not a "support" issue - this is not a "trouble ticket." There is nothing wrong with Handbrake.

Problems with HB are rare among support threads.

So you were encoding a... specific... source and you ran into some... trouble... with a filter not working the way you expected, so you'd like some... support... to better understand why you got the result you did. But the encode logs showing what you used and what you did are a Big Secret, so you'v...

What recommendations? Some bitrate target stupidity?

That's actually on the high side for bitrate for that movie IMO, as RF 20 for 1080 is pretty low.

Well, I apparently didn't realize the speed slider had a drastic effect on resulting bitrate of the files with the same RF. So that pretty much takes RF encoding off my list of usable resources unless someone has a bright idea? Yes, constant RF encoding is not the same quality across different pres...

An Activity Log is required for support requests. Please read How-to get an activity log? for details on how and why this should be provided.

So, what you are saying is that I can create a test clip to determine the best RF, using a sample clip with both moving and still content, which could be used as my future baseline RF for future h264 to h265 transcodes...assuming different test clips for 4K 1080p etc? I find things with plants and ...

Quality based encoding means the bitrate will depend heavily on the content (motion, grain, etc). As an example, Saving Private Ryan is about 15x the bitrate of The Social Network at the same quality and other settings. So there inherently can't be a formula for halving the size given an arbitrary i...

So to all you tech enthusiasts out there who have half a clue as to how to make this fully functional I encourage you to get on board and make this happen because this is a very useful function for the software. Oh and could I vote for encouraging the powers that be to reinstate the file size setti...

It's slow, has limited player compatibility, and the efficiency isn't much better.

It's a volunteer project, the partial implementation came free from upstream libraries, and as soon as you submit all the necessary code.

An Activity Log is required for support requests. Please read How-to get an activity log? for details on how and why this should be provided.

I have some ideas, but of course need the activity log to confirm rather than guessing blindly.

ridonkulous wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 01, 2018 9:50 am

Not trying to appear smart here

I wouldn't worry about that.

ridonkulous wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 01, 2018 9:50 am

if the option is there it baffles me why it doesn't work.

It's not fully implemented.

An Activity Log is required for support requests. Please read How-to get an activity log? for details on how and why this should be provided.

An Activity Log is required for support requests. Please read How-to get an activity log? for details on how and why this should be provided.

So I'm using 1.1.2 on Windows 7, and I'm encoding with h265 and grain tune. I've tried using NLMeans and its various strengths with its own grain tune, but the differences are negligible at best. You've set yourself up with conflicting settings. The x265 tune grain is targeted at retaining grain wi...

It can be done, but it's really for advanced users only, and doesn't work with all disks anyway.

Use a tool intended for ripping, like MakeMKV.

What'd you use to rip the disk?

Try ripping the whole title to MKV with MakeMKV, rather than piecewise out of the M2TS files.

Strictly speaking no, but give it a try and you may not care about any quality difference.

I think people often have overly dramatic imaginations of what losing quality will look like.

Nomis101 wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:26 am

mduell wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 24, 2018 3:36 pm

In general Macs are a poor value for encoding performance, ...

Really? Why?

There's no cheap way to buy a Mac with a lot of CPU and not much else.

Your computer is defective, most likely inadequate cooling although could be a power issue.

Clocks and cores is all that really matters.

Well, also not thermally throttling like you often see on laptops.

In general Macs are a poor value for encoding performance, much cheaper to use a PC with Windows or Linux.