2012-05-21, 01:48 | Link #42 | |
Translator, Producer
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Age: 44
|
Quote:
Mp3 = nearly universally compatible: crappy quality per bitrate compared to AAC AC-3 = Don't use unless encoding for DVDs or blurays... Quality sucks compared to AAC and even mp3 at lower bitrates FFmpeg = not really an audio codec, just a plugin to ffmpeg as the encoder: don't use unless you know what you are doing.
__________________
|
|
2012-05-26, 02:51 | Link #53 | |
Aegisub dev
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Age: 39
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2012-05-26, 08:37 | Link #56 |
Excessively jovial fellow
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: ISDB-T
Age: 37
|
"placebo" is called placebo for a reason, and that reason is (shock and awe) that it's mostly placebo. x264's slower modes suffer heavily from diminishing returns; placebo is incredibly much slower than veryslow, but the quality difference is pretty much entirely insignificant on a vast majority of sources. As I said, that's why it's called placebo.
If you want "the highest possible quality", just encode lossless. Sure, the file will be huge, but it'll be the highest possible quality by definition. If you think lossless is too huge for you, just use slower or veryslow with a CRF that satisfies your own eyes.
__________________
Last edited by TheFluff; 2012-05-26 at 08:59. |
2012-05-26, 10:20 | Link #57 | |
Translator, Producer
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Age: 44
|
Quote:
Since you don't care about precise filesize, go with CRF (Constant Quality) and choose a quality number based on how small you want the final file/how high quality you want it to be (lower the number, the higher the quality and higher the filesize). If it turns out too big for you, raise the number and try again. I have no idea what you mean by "small file size" so just experiment (quality number of 14-26 is common.). There's no need to modify any of the advanced settings.
__________________
|
|
2012-05-26, 16:46 | Link #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2012
|
I see....but does x264 really far surpasses xvid in encoding? I don't see anyone recommending it...
What is x264's advantages? Btw, am I supposed to choose x264 scratchpad then change the settings? or I'm supposed to pick what? Last edited by HauntingShock; 2012-05-26 at 17:14. |
2012-05-26, 17:22 | Link #59 | ||
Excessively jovial fellow
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: ISDB-T
Age: 37
|
Quote:
then you're either blind or living in 2004 just about absolutely everything Quote:
edit: i just re-read this sentence and it appears you're trying to re-encode a file that was already encoded with x264. don't do that. (just remux it instead)
__________________
|
||
2012-05-26, 18:36 | Link #60 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2012
|
Quote:
Edit: Isn't 2-pass recommendable? I saw threads saying it was good? Last edited by HauntingShock; 2012-05-26 at 19:41. |
|
|
|