I want to encode a 480x360 video.
If I feed x264 a 960x720 source video, with more detail than it would have if I make it the same size as the output, would x264 compress it better or have more quality?
Bigger Source Video
Forum rules
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.
-
Deleted User 13735
Re: Bigger Source Video
Don't quite understand what you are asking.
Are you upscaling 480x360 to 960x720?
Or are you downscaling 960x720 to 480x360?
In either case, altering the resolution will not result in higher quality. It's just math.
Are you upscaling 480x360 to 960x720?
Or are you downscaling 960x720 to 480x360?
In either case, altering the resolution will not result in higher quality. It's just math.
Re: Bigger Source Video
The end results will always be 480x360
But, will x264 make better predictions and whatnot if the source video is double the size of the output.
I export to lossless AVI first after edition and then work with handbreak to determine the best configuration.
But, will x264 make better predictions and whatnot if the source video is double the size of the output.
I export to lossless AVI first after edition and then work with handbreak to determine the best configuration.
-
Deleted User 13735
Re: Bigger Source Video
No. Halving the dimensions will output only 1/4 of the data contained in the source. It's just math.But, will x264 make better predictions and whatnot if the source video is double the size of the output.
If you are by chance thinking in the context of analog still photography, it doesn't work that way in digital imaging, either still or video.
Re: Bigger Source Video
I was just thinking that a bigger source video has more details about the little movements and edges, so maybe.
I don't know if it's clear, but no matter what I will output to half the dimentions of the original.
But, will that output be better if I feed x264 the original full size or a lossless version of the original resized to half dimentions (same as final output).
I don't know if it's clear, but no matter what I will output to half the dimentions of the original.
But, will that output be better if I feed x264 the original full size or a lossless version of the original resized to half dimentions (same as final output).
-
Deleted User 13735
Re: Bigger Source Video
"But, will that output be better if I feed x264 the original full size or a lossless version of the original resized to half dimentions (same as final output)."
That depends entirely on the resizing method used to shrink the video. The Lanczos 3 resizing in Handbrake works pretty darned good, much better than bicubic used by many editors, especially where there is motion detail and moire. That has nothing to do with the x264 encoder. I do many downconversions for Youtube and Vimeo, and I give Handbrake the full-sized version and let it do the work. You will still lose 3/4 of the video information no matter how you do it.
That depends entirely on the resizing method used to shrink the video. The Lanczos 3 resizing in Handbrake works pretty darned good, much better than bicubic used by many editors, especially where there is motion detail and moire. That has nothing to do with the x264 encoder. I do many downconversions for Youtube and Vimeo, and I give Handbrake the full-sized version and let it do the work. You will still lose 3/4 of the video information no matter how you do it.