H.264 (iPod) setting creates unusually large files

[macericpet]

Ripped a DVD using the new H.264 (iPod) setting and MPEG-4, also HB latest MPEG-4 and got very different file sizes:

Movie #1 (MediaFork iPod setting)
Princess Bride
H.624
1h38m
720x400
1.4mbps
2 pass
file size:1.05gb

Movie #2 (MediaFork MPEG-4 setting)
Princess Bride
MPEG-4
1h38m
720x400
2.0mbps
2 pass
file size:1.53gb

Movie #3 (Handbrake H.264 setting)
The Incredibles
H.264
1h55m
720x304
760kbps
2 pass
file size:530mb

I know I'm not comparing apples to apples with movie #1 and #3 but in all honesty would the lower bitrate and new iPod setting really make that big of a file size difference?

It seems like even the MPEG-4 (movie#2) is high when compared to other similar Handbrake rips.

[baggss]

Yes it will. 640x480 can more than double the file size over 320x240. Bitrate will increase it a bit too.

For example, If i rip a 50 min TV episode in HB with the old 1.3 settings with 320x240, 768k it's about ~350Mb. In MF with the 3.0 settings, 320x240 but 1500k, it's about ~500Mb.

[macericpet]

[quote="baggss"]Yes it will. 640x480 can more than double the file size over 320x240. Bitrate will increase it a bit too.

Yeah, but in the case of movie#1 versus #3 the resolutions are similar 720x400 and 720x304 so the bitrate increase from 760 to 1.4 causes a movie that is almost 30 minutes runtime longer to be half the file size.

I didn't really notice that much of a difference in quality for double the size. Maybe I'll just stick with MPEG-4.

[jbrjake]

Bitrate: the number of bits used per second.
Length: the number of seconds the video lasts
Filesize: the number of bits in the video

Bitrate * Length = Filesize

You change the bitrate, you change the filesize.

There is nothing "unusual" about it.

The point of setting the bitrate at 1500 is to get the maximum possible quality h.264 which plays on the iPod, not so much for what you can see on the iPod screen, but so that you can have something that also looks good on a computer. Nothing stops you from lowering it.

[charliez]

All this said, and my being a new user of Instant HandBrake, what's the difference for the end user between using the iPod 5g(H.264) and the iPod 5g(MPEG-4) settings? File size? Image/sound quality? Speed? I've seen people mention the use of each, but not why they use one over the other.

So far I'm using MPEG-4 (just because the first stuff I read seemed to indicate that this was the way to go), and my file sizes look like this:

Run time: 1:42:54
File size: 980.5 MB

Run time: 1:52:04
File size: 1.04 GB

Run time: 1:59:13
File size: 1.1 GB

Run time2:11:01
File size: 1.21 GB

Any guidance? Thanks.

[baggss]

For me, it's file size. If I can get a 01:37:29 Movie (Clerks II) at 614.6Mb and still have it look pretty good on a 42 inch plasma, I'm happy. Size is more important for me considering the size of an iPod Hard Drive that has Music and Video on it.

[dynaflash]

There is a ton of opinion on this. And ulitmately it is personal opinion. In a nutshell. h.264 will give you a better picture at a lower bitrate (read file size) than mpeg 4. Now, to speak for the iPod platform, I use my ipod alot on a 36" tv. A 1500 kbps h.264 encode looks better than a 2500 kbps mpeg4 encode at almost half the file size. That is a great tradeoff in my book.

For the record, bitrate is for the most part the determining factor in the file size. Try a test. Run everything the same, encoder, bitrate, etc. but do the exact same movie at 640 x xxx then just change the picture settings to 320 x xxx. You will notice that for all practical intents and purposes. the two movies will be the same file size. Even though the picture size is twice as wide on the large one. As jbrjake said: bitrate is filesize.

[baggss]

I have noticed that picture size (640 vs 320) slows encoding down massively (65 FPS > 15FPS) while bit rate seems to have no impact on rip speed at all.