Encoder settings for optimal quality?

[drkr]

So I'm curious about what would be good choices when it comes to encoding a DVD... I'm not fussed about size so I've tried constant RF @ 15 and it looks rather clean (well, DVDs don't look perfect to begin with) but constant RF doesn't look at the frames much in terms of detail, does it? (honestly, I don't know much about this stuff)

Also, I'm not fussed about encoder speed. My PC is on most of the time anyway but I have no idea what any of the stuff is on the advanced tab... though is it possible to change a few of those settings so it does a more 'optimal' encode?

[mduell]

If you don't care about size, don't reencode. Just keep the DVD rips.

[drkr]

If you don't care about size, don't reencode. Just keep the DVD rips.

Nah, I want them in MKV. The size of a DVD (7GB) is a bit unnecessary when a 2GB± encode will look just as good (plus it crops off borders, cleans up interlacing and puts it in one easy file that I can put on my PS3 by remuxing if I want to).

I'm just want to know if I can optimize the encoded file's quality.

[Deleted User 11865]

RF19.

[drkr]

Okay, so say an RF15encode chucked out a 2.5GB file. If I define a target size of 2.5GB instead would the quality be better than the RF15 encode because of the multi-passes or whatever? Though I understand at RF15 there's probably not gonna be much in the way of quality loss when it comes to a DVD encode.

I guess I shouldn't be bothering since the encodes I've done already looked fine, still it's nice knowing that you chose the 'right' encoder settings. Any advice on the more advanced settings? Would choosing the "high profile" preset chuck out a more 'optimal' encode? o_O

[Deleted User 11865]

RF15 is overkill. RF19-18 should be visually transparent to the source.

Anamorphic Strict will preserve source quality a bit better than Loose at the expense of slightly larger files.

Okay, so say an RF15encode chucked out a 2.5GB file. If I define a target size of 2.5GB instead would the quality be better than the RF15 encode? Though I understand at RF15 there's probably not gonna be much in the way of quality loss when it comes to a DVD encode.

If you use 2-pass, they will be almost identical. If you use 1-pass the constant quality encode will have better quality.

Anyway, there's no point in running a CQ encode then 2-pass - sometimes the CQ encode will look slightly better than 2-pass, sometimes 2-pass will win, but the difference will be negligible either way. Just stick to CQ.

[creamyhorror]

Okay, so say an RF15encode chucked out a 2.5GB file. If I define a target size of 2.5GB instead would the quality be better than the RF15 encode because of the multi-passes or whatever?

In a nutshell, no. The 2nd pass of a 2-pass encode is essentially the same thing as a CQ/CRF encode.

RF15 is overkill. RF19-18 should be visually transparent to the source.

While RF 18-19 often looks very decent, it may have mediocre grain retention on more difficult, noisier sources (although you may have to be watching carefully to notice/feel it). In such cases either a lower CRF like 16-17 or higher aq-strength and psy-rd strength (or even qcomp) is a fair option to take.

Of course, to most people RF 18-19 will look just fine, so it all depends on what level of paranoia (some might say obsessiveness) you want to adopt.

[cowboyup910]

im new what does RF mean?

[jamiemlaw]

Essentially, "quality loss". 0 means that no quality is lost; 51 means that by the end you'll have something that only slightly resembles your original video. Here are the three basic rules:

• If you intend to use anything lower than 15, you might as well just keep the original file, because what you get out will not only be lower quality than what you put in, but will be much, much larger in file size.
• Use around 20 for SD video, including DVDs
• Use around 23 for HD video, including Blu-Rays

[jbrjake]

Essentially, "quality loss". 0 means that no quality is lost

No...the "lossless" part of QP 0 is not "lossless quality." As far as I understand, it means no DCT coefficients are dropped. There's no loss of data from the transform. But that is *not* the same as no loss in quality. It just means that it is doing the best job it can of approximating the image using cosine waves. It's still not going to be precisely the same as the source, so technically some quality is still being lost, I believe.

[cowboyup910]

how about if you set to constant quality default at like 60.78%, under the advance reference frame (RF) is set to 2. i dont see an option to select 20. max is 16. is that what this RF is means?

[mduell]

RF is rate factor, the number below the constant quality slider where it says "RF."

[Trevor68]

Ok, I'll ask the hilariously obvious question then shall I? How do you change RF?

After reading many discussions on it, I would like to change mine from 20 to 22 for bluray rips. I now have a excellent understanding of what it does, and no clue where to actually change it.

[Deleted User 11865]

It's controlled by the Constant Quality slider.

[Trevor68]

OMG, I thought that was just the Quality Percentage! Theres a blond moment if I ever had one!

[IronHorse]

Found this thread and read through it and others. I'm just starting to use handbrake. I'm using the latest build, and the AppleTV presets. I'm converting Video_TS files and while those files if burned to a dvd look fine, dark scenes in MP4 conversions lose a lot of detail and also seem darker overall... but daylight scenes are fine. Tried using "20" with no real change. I am not interested in a minimal size conversion... some are under 1 GB. I would be happy to give up 2 GB if I could ensure the problems would go away. Should I just select 2 GB as a size or would I be better off using a different number value like 15 or 23? Which way gives me better quality output? And if you change slider value, should you leave everything else alone?