is it worth to convert my video archive to h.265 mp4 from h.264 mkv?

[MrPsych]

a friend told me that h.265 is able to hold the same quality of videos, but in a smaller space due than its h.264 father.

 

would it be worth it to retroactively convert some of the videos in my archive to save some space? (but keeping my viewing experience the same, ie graphic fidelity)

[a_block_of_wood]

Interesting. Makes a lot of sense if you are trying to compare h.264 and h.265 when you have the original lossless source?

 

Converting lossy to another lossy from experience, usually mean some quality lost. Again, I'm no expert, just someone who used to convert mpeg1-> h.264.

[KemoKa]

It's not perfect 50% reduction, but 265 does certainly compress very well compared to 264

 

http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/H265-264FileSize.png

 

here's just one benchmark. i can find more if you wish.

[MrPsych]

Interesting. Makes a lot of sense if you are trying to compare h.264 and h.265 when you have the original lossless source?

 

Converting lossy to another lossy from experience, usually mean some quality lost. Again, I'm no expert, just someone who used to convert mpeg1-> h.264.

 

yeah, it does make sense to encode in h265 rather than h264 when working with the original source

but dam i guess if going from lossy to another lossy would result in more lost data I guess it's not for me then lol

 

what type of data do you think would be a lossless source?

 

It's not perfect 50% reduction, but 265 does certainly compress very well compared to 264

 

http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/H265-264FileSize.png

 

here's just one benchmark. i can find more if you wish.

 

despite not being a perfect 50% reduction that's what like 35-40% in most of the cases? Assuming equivalent video quality, any decrease in file size is great in my books

[KemoKa]

 

despite not being a perfect 50% reduction that's what like 35-40% in most of the cases? Assuming equivalent video quality, any decrease in file size is great in my books

that's what I'm saying. if it were audio, it would be a different story, but in terms of video compression, that's a really good ratio.

 

[.spider.]

Makes absolutely no sense disk space is too cheap and encoding too slow.

The first question should be which h265 encoder would you use?

[workbetterv]

I recommend iDealshare VideoGo

It can encode or decode H.265/HEVC on Windows and Mac.

Step by step guide at http://www.idealshare.net/video-converter/h265-converter-for-mac-windows.html

[.spider.]

I recommend iDealshare VideoGo

It can encode or decode H.265/HEVC on Windows and Mac.

Step by step guide at http://www.idealshare.net/video-converter/h265-converter-for-mac-windows.html

And it uses which encoder?

[ALwin]

I wouldn't, especially from H.264 to H.265.  The gain in disk space is not worth the potential loss in quality.

 

If it were from another format, such as ProRes 444 HQ to H.265, depending on what your needs are it may be worth it.  But if you're a video producer/editor keeping the master copies in their original format out of the camera is essential for those times "just in case" when you need them, unless you do not need those clips anymore.