HandBrake

VP9 UHD films not supported by my Panasonic UB420
HandBrake 1.2.2:
Windows 10 x64:

Hello,
As Youtube VP9 4K (3840x2160) are not supported by my Panasonic UB420, what are the minimum Handbrake settings required to convert them to HEVC without loosing picture quality ?
Thanks.
JJ.

Choose any HEVC preset. But as for 'without loosing picture quality' you seem to have just recently came ashore from the clown ship, nice joke. Your request is impossible. Sorry.

Sarcastic comments notwithstanding, all re-encoding causes some generational loss. Whether this can be seen or not is the subject of much discussion, and will continue to be so.

Since you are concerned about retaining quality, you would choose the slower software encoder x265, not a fast hardware encoder like HEVC under QSV or NVENC.

As far as choosing the right preset, use the same dimensions, frame rate, and a CQ of around 22 to start. Then adjust to suit your PERSONAL tastes for quality, file size, playability on YOUR system, and encoding speed.

If you would like to receive opinions about particular settings, accompanying encoding logs are a requirement (see forum headers).

Could you please post your HB logs, instructions can be found here:

https://handbrake.fr/docs/en/latest/hel ... y-log.html

What I meant by not loosing picture quality was that given the source being already encoded with "loss" I guess, I was wondering if it was possible to convert it into another format with as little loss as possible. But it seems that this is not possible.
Of course the best "lossless" solution is to use another mediaplayer that accepts VP9 encoded films, and that's probably what I am going to look after, as I do not feel like spending hours after hours converting the 4K documentaries that I have already downloaded from youtube and more to come.
Nevertheless I have tried a few combinations and found out that re-encoding with H.264 NVEnc using my Nvidia graphic card the process goes much faster, and a CQ of 22 is fine too, everything else being the same as the original. (H.264 as my card does not seem to support x265).
Thanks for your help.
JJ

I was wondering if it was possible to convert it into another format with as little loss as possible.

Taken in light of your first post, that is a realistic expectation. x265 is a very good, and slow encoder that gives small file sizes.

x264 is also a very good choice. It produces larger files that encode more quickly than x265. It is not "worse" than VP9 or x265, except that it is rarely used above mainstream 8 bit production.

Perhaps if you thought of it this way:

Playability comes first and foremost. After that, size, quality, speed, whichever is most important to you (but not all three).

... and found out that re-encoding with H.264 NVEnc using my Nvidia graphic card the process goes much faster, and a CQ of 22 is fine too,

You have also said twice that retaining quality, not speed, is the most important to you. If that is "really" the case, stick with x265. / x264 software encoders, and save HEVC and NVENC h264 for when you need a quick encode, like yesterday. I rarely repeat myself, but this is a big deal to me. Not only do GPU solutions sacrifice quality for speed, it's also good to avoid being at crossed purposes with one's own goals. Hardware h264 is tantalizing because it is fast; however, when it is all done, it comes across a bit like a bad date.

musicvid wrote: ↑Mon Aug 12, 2019 12:14 am Perhaps if you thought of it this way:
Playability comes first and foremost. After that, size, quality, speed, whichever is most important to you (but not all three).

... and found out that re-encoding with H.264 NVEnc using my Nvidia graphic card the process goes much faster, and a CQ of 22 is fine too,

You have also said twice that retaining quality, not speed, is the most important to you. If that is "really" the case, stick with x265. / x264 software encoders, and save HEVC and NVENC h264 for when you need a quick encode, like yesterday. I rarely repeat myself, but this is a big deal to me. Not only do GPU solutions sacrifice quality for speed, it's also good to avoid being at crossed purposes with one's own goals. Hardware h264 is tantalizing because it is fast; however, when it is all done, it comes across a bit like a bad date.

Good point there ! I did not know that using the GC the encoding quality was not as good as with soft encoders, in fact I even thought the contrary ...
It's just that it takes such a long time ... a 7 minutes 4K VP9 youtube doc took me 1 h 32 minutes yesterday using the x265 encoder, maybe my PC (not purposedly made for video stuff) is a bit on the low side too : i-4770K 3.5 GHz (not overclocked), 16 GB ram and W10 x64.

Also conversion speed is not the priority really, no question if I only had to convert a few short docs, but I already downloaded a lot of them and some last more than an hour.

But still I will search for another dedicated mediaplayer (Zapitti maybe ?) as the Panasonic UB420 excellent for real Blu Rays but very poor for medias like mkv's is soooooooo slow, it's unbearable with a diaporama where loading each picture takes ages (well about 5 seconds maybe) alternating with system messages like "loading", a progression bar, etc ....
By comparison my Himedia Q5 is almost instantaneaous, pity that the display quality is bad compared to the ub420 especially with pictures, and showing pictures is also one of my favourites.

PS: By the way I have a dedicated 256 GB SSD as a cache only ( not the system SSD), with Handbrake I have not seen a parameter to declare it as a work disk, that could accelerate the conversions just like with SW's like RAR and others (Photoshop).
JJ.

musicvid wrote: ↑Sun Aug 11, 2019 3:31 pm Sarcastic comments notwithstanding

Yeh but you liked it right? Come on, don't be shy

Not being native english, it took me a little time to get it .......

You can encode it fast or you can encode it good. Don't expect both and you will not be disappointed.
H264 QSV / NVENC is fast, and absolutely horrid, IMO.

In the H.265 video codec choices i see H.265 12-bit, H.265 10-bit and H.265 only, 10 and 12 bits are self explanatory, but what's the caracteristics of H.265 alone ?

8 bit

jj-34 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:40 amPS: By the way I have a dedicated 256 GB SSD as a cache only ( not the system SSD), with Handbrake I have not seen a parameter to declare it as a work disk, that could accelerate the conversions just like with SW's like RAR and others (Photoshop).

No, not useful to HB.

mduell wrote: ↑Mon Aug 12, 2019 3:50 pm8 bit

Of course, what else !

mduell wrote: ↑Mon Aug 12, 2019 3:58 pm

jj-34 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:40 amPS: By the way I have a dedicated 256 GB SSD as a cache only ( not the system SSD), with Handbrake I have not seen a parameter to declare it as a work disk, that could accelerate the conversions just like with SW's like RAR and others (Photoshop).

No, not useful to HB.

OK.

Yeah, the only thing written to disk is the output file and the 2-pass stats file (only if you're doing two-pass). Neither of them are disk intensive enough to warrant an SSD.

... in terms of quality loss

As far as I have experienced so far, quality is primarily depending on bandwidth.

I just have converted an UHD MKV rip (Transformers 5) with original overall bitrate (according to MediaInfo) 71,3 Mb/s to another MKV with overall bitrate 21,8 Mb/s with no (for me) visible loss of quality on my LG-OLED-55C6V.
Size Original (Win 10) 80,7 GB --> after Recode 24,7 GB

Using HB 1.2.2 Codec h.265 Nvidia NVEnc
Duration original Movie 2:34 hours, encoding @ 44 fps (network drive)