Quality v. Speed?

General questions or discussion about HandBrake, Video and/or audio transcoding, trends etc.
Post Reply
Bodhi395
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:37 am

Quality v. Speed?

Post by Bodhi395 »

I have just bought a mac mini and have it hooked up to my LCD television. I want to rip all my DVD's to the mini(I'll probably need another hard drive) and have my entire collection digital and ready to play. My problem is when using handbrake I can either use the MPEG-4 setting which is very fast, or the H.264 setting which is on my machine at least 3 times slower. Is it worth the quality difference to use the H.264 setting? My collection is fairly large and on that setting it takes usually over 2 hours to rip a DVD. I have at least a 100 DVD's and I don't want to be sitting around ripping dvd's for weeks until they are all on my machine if I can do it faster using the other setting.
Cavalicious
Moderator
Posts: 1804
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:07 am

Post by Cavalicious »

You answered your question yourself...which is really the only answer that you need.
PuzZLeR
Bright Spark User
Posts: 287
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:01 am

Post by PuzZLeR »

My opinion is this - if you want to archive and keep video for the future then H.264 at the highest settings is worth the extra time for the extra quality and the compatibility of the future.

But if you are encoding something only for a quick view on an iPod or something like that - not for archiving - then H.264's long encoding times are not worth it. Use MPEG-4 instead.

In fact nothing is worth encoding to H.264, IMO, unless you're archiving video - not even for iPod or Apple TV.

Sorry guys. If I'm going to encode to H.264 and endure the mega encoding times, I want all the specs of the standard, not some watered down version for a device that will only be around for today.
Post Reply