Re-encoding movie library to x265

[Juanitology]

On 1/19/2017 at 8:36 PM, Zodiark1593 said:

I would love to go x265, but aside from Nala, I've nothing that will actually play h.265 video with any competency. So no space savings for me.

any desktop CPU from like the past 5 years or mobile CPU from the last 3 should be able to play h.265 without a problem.

[Ramaddil]

On 1/16/2017 at 3:59 PM, Terodius said:

I haven't started re-encoding my TV shows and Animes yet. The problem is Handbrake doesn't have a batch-edit system, so you have to do it file by file and it just takes an assload of time. I wish you could just select an entire folder at a time and say use this settings for all files but you can't. That's why I'm doing my movies first. 

There is a way to batch convert, put all of the files you want to convert into a folder drag said folder into handbreak, set your settings then hit add all, then convert.

[dalekphalm]

43 minutes ago, Ramaddil said:

There is a way to batch convert, put all of the files you want to convert into a folder drag said folder into handbreak, set your settings then hit add all, then convert.

@Terodius indeed as mentioned, Handbrake has been capable of batch encoding for years. Here's a random guide to get you started:

https://www.winxdvd.com/resource/handbrake-batch-convert-tutorial.htm

[Juanitology]

16 hours ago, Ramaddil said:

There is a way to batch convert, put all of the files you want to convert into a folder drag said folder into handbreak, set your settings then hit add all, then convert.

as far as I know you can't do this because of having to individually select the audio and subtitle tracks you want for every file. 

[Juanitology]

15 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

@Terodius indeed as mentioned, Handbrake has been capable of batch encoding for years. Here's a random guide to get you started:

https://www.winxdvd.com/resource/handbrake-batch-convert-tutorial.htm

Right but I'd only be able to do that with straight conversions. I also add/delete subtitles and audio tracks that I want/don't want. That's why I can't just say "encode these 20 files in this folder". I do use the same custom preset that I saved for all of them, but as far as I've seen you can't batch add .srt files or edit the audio tracks.

[dalekphalm]

1 hour ago, Terodius said:

Right but I'd only be able to do that with straight conversions. I also add/delete subtitles and audio tracks that I want/don't want. That's why I can't just say "encode these 20 files in this folder". I do use the same custom preset that I saved for all of them, but as far as I've seen you can't batch add .srt files or edit the audio tracks.

You might be able to script that kind of thing, assuming all the variables are the same every time. Assuming you're running Windows, you can probably find a guide to creating a batch file script. This script would, if possible, add all your custom options, then add it to the Batch Conversion queue.

 

The batch conversion is mostly for running multiple encodes, that you've already configured, without you having to start each one.

[79wjd]

I totally would encode everything to x265 if it wasn't for the fact that it takes forever on my 4690k to encode a single movie.

[dalekphalm]

2 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

I totally would encode everything to x265 if it wasn't for the fact that it takes forever on my 4690k to encode a single movie.

How long are we talking, for say a blu-ray quality 1080p movie?

[Speakerator]

I tested this on my 2500 non-k and it took around 2.5h to recode a one hour long episode of Game Of Thrones from h254 to h.255 running full tilt at 3.8 GHz on all four cores. The file size went from 5.6GB to ~900 MB while still remaining a "decent" quality, though I haven't been nitpicking screenshots nor was the file in question the most "high quality" source file. Encoding times really depend on your setting of the "quality slider" in Handbrake. I've set it to 23. Increasing quality (18) increased rendering times by ~1h.

If you have a test file, do a quick test for yourself, since there are many variables in place.

[79wjd]

50 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

How long are we talking, for say a blu-ray quality 1080p movie?

With RF 20, slow preset, and a 30GB 2 hour-ish movie, I think like 8-10 hours. 

[dalekphalm]

22 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

With RF 20, slow preset, and a 30GB 2 hour-ish movie, I think like 8-10 hours. 

Holy crap... I'm used to doing encodes in like 20-30 minutes, with x264 and raw BuRay rips, at RF 18. And that was on my old CPU, a Xeon w3520 (i7-920 equivalent, 4c8t).

[79wjd]

3 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

Holy crap... I'm used to doing encodes in like 20-30 minutes, with x264 and raw BuRay rips, at RF 18. And that was on my old CPU, a Xeon w3520 (i7-920 equivalent, 4c8t).

Was it also on slow preset? I don't think x264 on slow goes anywhere near that fast for me either. I'm also not sure how much of a speed difference RF 18 vs. 20 makes. 

[Ramaddil]

17 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Was it also on slow preset? I don't think x264 on slow goes anywhere near that fast for me either. I'm also not sure how much of a speed difference RF 18 vs. 20 makes. 

I think the difference is probably minimal all things being equal.  Still depends on file size and any extra settings for speed.  Mostly CRF and your quality setting comes down to file size and overall bitrate given the source file.

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, Ramaddil said:

I think the difference is probably minimal all things being equal.  Still depends on file size and any extra settings for speed.  Mostly CRF and your quality setting comes down to file size and overall bitrate given the source file.

Presumably we're using similarly sized source files since most blurays range from 20-30GB~.

[AshleyAshes]

See, I just don't get this.  You guys are talking about a HUGE investment in processing time and the electricity consumption of running a PC's CPU full tit to transcode an entire library.  ...Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeanwhile, I got an 8TB HDD for $199 Canadian on Boxing Day.

[79wjd]

6 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

See, I just don't get this.  You guys are talking about a HUGE investment in processing time and the electricity consumption of running a PC's CPU full tit to transcode an entire library.  ...Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeanwhile, I got an 8TB HDD for $199 Canadian on Boxing Day.

I can turn 8TB into 1.5TB~ saving me the need to buy another HDD -- and the "other" hdd would probably be a 4TB WD Red, which costs $150~. 

 

An 8TB HDD can hold about 260 raw movies and it takes about 100 days to encode. Now, running my 4690k at 100% 24/7 for 100 days costs costs $38. So encoding is still cheaper than buying more drives. 

 

With that said, I still haven't encoded most of my library because a part of me wants to have the absolute best quality....even though I can't really see a difference. 

[Ramaddil]

39 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

I can turn 8TB into 1.5TB~ saving me the need to buy another HDD -- and the "other" hdd would probably be a 4TB WD Red, which costs $150~. 

 

An 8TB HDD can hold about 260 raw movies and it takes about 100 days to encode. Now, running my 4690k at 100% 24/7 for 100 days costs costs $38. So encoding is still cheaper than buying more drives. 

 

With that said, I still haven't encoded most of my library because a part of me wants to have the absolute best quality....even though I can't really see a difference. 

I agree with this... I have been mulling whether or not I want to start doing X265 on all new movies, but I am still concerned with compatibility issues, and the amount of time it takes per encode.  Plus I am always on the look out for higher quality of movies that I already have and the quickest way to check the quality is by file size.  When I have a movie that is a DVD quality at a Gig or less I try to replace it with 3-5gb version 720 or 1080p.

[79wjd]

Are there any x265 or x264 settings that look almost indistinguishable from source material while shrinking the file size noticeably (<10GB~)? And what kind of difference does the profile, presets, and tunings make? 

 

I did an x265 encode in Handbrake at RF20, slow preset, and "none" profile on a 30GB file. It took about 9 hours and it was reduced to about 3.5GB, but while it still looks good, the difference with the original is still noticeable.  I'm now testing x264 RF18 and very slow preset (since x265 was taking ridiculously long), but rather than spend all the time running dozens of different encodes and comparing them, I wanted to see if someone else has already done most of the leg work.

 

I did the RF20 encode in Handbrake 0.10.5.0 (I forgot to update it first) -- if that makes any difference. 

[dalekphalm]

27 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Are there any x265 or x264 settings that look almost indistinguishable from source material while shrinking the file size noticeably (<10GB~)? And what kind of difference does the profile, presets, and tunings make? 

 

I did an x265 encode in Handbrake at RF20, slow preset, and "none" profile on a 30GB file. It took about 9 hours and it was reduced to about 3.5GB, but while it still looks good, the difference with the original is still noticeable.  I'm now testing x264 RF18 and very slow preset (since x265 was taking ridiculously long), but rather than spend all the time running dozens of different encodes and comparing them, I wanted to see if someone else has already done most of the leg work.

 

I did the RF20 encode in Handbrake 0.10.5.0 (I forgot to update it first) -- if that makes any difference. 

I'm curious too. I just got my FreeNAS build running in good shape, and while I do have 12.5TB of usable space, I don't want to waste it unnecessarily.

 

12.5TB = ~427 30GB uncompressed Blu-Ray rips (Which could realistically be bigger or smaller too. I've not seen many direct rips bigger than 30GB, but I have seen some smaller). But that's not considering TV series, which will significantly reduce that number.

 

If we make some assumptions to give us some averages:

10GB per episode

12 episodes per season

4 season show

Average 10 shows on Blu-Ray

 

10 shows, w/ 4 Seasons each, at 120GB per season, eats up a good chunk of the storage pool (4800GB), so we subtract 4800GB from 12.5TB (12800GB) and we get:

8000GB remaining:

~267 movies

 

Now that's a lot, no question. But growing a movie collection to over 270 movies, and 10 TV shows, on Blu-Ray, is not difficult, and there are many "normal" people who have collections this large or larger.

 

Anyway, getting back on topic, I would be interested in knowing which h265 encode settings can create a "no discernible difference" encode, how big that file ends up being, and how long did it take on what hardware?

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

Anyway, getting back on topic, I would be interested in knowing which h265 encode settings can create a "no discernible difference" encode, how big that file ends up being, and how long did it take on what hardware?

For what it's worth, the encode I did looks pretty close to the original. From a normal viewing distance and when watching a movie and not studying each frame it's not exactly noticeable......But I don't have a space issue yet and I can afford to add more storage if I need to, so I'd just assume not lose that quality for arguably no reason. 

 

One of these two is the original from MakeMKV and one of these two is the encode using the x265 settings above. 

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

For what it's worth, the encode I did looks pretty close to the original. From a normal viewing distance and when watching a movie and not studying each frame it's not exactly noticeable......But I don't have a space issue yet and I can afford to add more storage if I need to, so I'd just assume not lose that quality for arguably no reason. 

 

 

  Hide contents

 

 

One of these two is the original from MakeMKV and one of these two is the encode using the x265 settings above. 




 

 

I agree. I have 12.5TB to work with, and I can triple (or more) that space, if I need to (and of course, want to hurt my wallet by buying more HDD's).

 

In my last server build, I ripped the Blu-Ray using MakeMKV, then used Handbrake to encode at RF18 (I don't recall the other settings), and that produced pretty good quality files, that were for the most part, indistinguishable. But the space savings was all over the place. Some would go from 30GB to 25GB. Others from 30GB to 8GB, etc.

 

For my new build, and since I have a ton more Blu-Rays to rip and add, I'm considering just ripping them as-is, and not encoding them at all.

 

BTW, do you know if the new version of Handbrake can passthru Blu-Ray subtitles? When I was doing it (3-4 years ago now, I guess), Handbrake didn't understand the Blu-Ray subtitle format, so you'd have to do one of two things:

1. Extract the Subtitles from the Blu-Ray -> Encode via Handbrake -> Reinsert Subs into the MKV file, or

2. Extract Subs -> Use converter to convert subs into a format Handbrake understands -> Add subs in while doing encode

 

I opted for option #2, for some reason (I forget why). IIRC, Blu-Ray subs are essentially image files, and the converter I used took advantage of OCR technology, but it wasn't perfect. It was actually a mega pain in the ass.

[79wjd]

2 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

BTW, do you know if the new version of Handbrake can passthru Blu-Ray subtitles?

No idea, I never touch subtitles. 

[dalekphalm]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

No idea, I never touch subtitles. 

When you say that, you mean when you rip movies, you exclude the subs? Don't bother including them in the final video file?

 

I don't use subs often, but for the sake of any user who decides to watch a movie on my network, I like to have them there (Though I usually strip out anything but English).

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

When you say that, you mean when you rip movies, you exclude the subs? Don't bother including them in the final video file?

 

I don't use subs often, but for the sake of any user who decides to watch a movie on my network, I like to have them there (Though I usually strip out anything but English).

I don't even touch the subtitle tab, so I have no idea. 

 

[AshleyAshes]

21 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

I can turn 8TB into 1.5TB~ saving me the need to buy another HDD -- and the "other" hdd would probably be a 4TB WD Red, which costs $150~. 

 

An 8TB HDD can hold about 260 raw movies and it takes about 100 days to encode. Now, running my 4690k at 100% 24/7 for 100 days costs costs $38. So encoding is still cheaper than buying more drives. 

 

With that said, I still haven't encoded most of my library because a part of me wants to have the absolute best quality....even though I can't really see a difference. 

It's still a tremendous investment of processing time for a destructive process.  I'll go with the fat hard drives.