[Q] How to significantly reduce file size

[edd1234]

Hi,
I've been ripping blu-rays up until recently with all the commercial (crap) packages, xilisoft and the like. They generally produced decent quality 4ish gig files.

Then I started using handbrake on the "normal" and "high profile" settings and my encodes looked a lot better, but were around 10gigs, which doesn't work when streaming to a cheap chinese hdmi media player box, from a network drive.

For a few blu-ray movies I own, I downloaded a copy from an encoding team called "YIFY", and all their movies seem to be around 2gb or less, and were of similar quality to my 10gb encodes - or at least as far as my eyes could discern.

I'm not looking for the perfect encoding settings - it probably varies by movie, but I'm just looking for a rough idea of how to scale down my file size in the same way these encoders do.

On the new handbrake nightlies they've included "x264 options", where you can slow down the speed of the conversion to increase compression efficiency - I've tried this and it does have a difference, but not a massive difference.

Should I be changing the RF Value?

I've noticed some of my encodes have an overall bit rate of around 10mbps, whereas some of the equivalent YIFY ones are around 2mbps (or 2000kbps). Is this achieved through the RF Value, or manually setting bitrate, or something else?

Many thanks.

[blud7]

If file size is your major concern, use a 2-pass encode @>2000 kbps.
Commercial encoders boast how quickly their products work, usually because they use less video analysis and hence produce crappy output. (Usually one-pass bitrate based)

Personally, I'd cut piece of the video and test various CRF values and target where the bitrate is about 2500 kbps.
Since your source is BluRay, you could get away with CRF 22 or greater.

On another note, I've seen YIFY encodes at a friend's house. They mostly suck. Unless you're viewing on a tablet.
Handbrake is also not my encoder of choice, for many reasons. I find MeGUI is the best.

[edd1234]

Thanks for the fast reply.

Size isn't my main concern - I was hoping for blu-ray rips about 4gb or less, 1080p and that didn't have any noticeable lack of quality - meaning you'd have a hard time telling the encode and blu-ray apart.

From what I've heard it's better to set an RF Value and let the computer manage the bitrate, than try and set it yourself, although I don't know much about it and may be very wrong about that.

[davexnet]

Try these settings. They are based loosely on recommendations Jagabo gave some time ago.
--preset veryfast --crf 18 --level 4 --keyint 100 --ref 3 --bframes 2 --vbv-bufsize 25000 --vbv-maxrate 20000

I created a preset in Staxrip, you can probably do the same in Handbrake. Play with the CRF value;
18 - 22 is a good place to start, with the higher numbers giving the smaller files.

[blud7]

Size isn't my main concern - I was hoping for blu-ray rips about 4gb or less

That's a contradiction right there. But it is understandable. Many folks seek out magic settings, resisting the idea that if they want a certain file size, 2-pass is the best option. I'll give you some tips:
1. Use a light denoiser
2. Try CRF 22-26 @ medium or slower speed
3. Adjust tune=film for non-grainy material, grain to preserve grain and animation for toons
That should help give you your result.

[edd1234]

Try these settings. They are based loosely on recommendations Jagabo gave some time ago.
--preset veryfast --crf 18 --level 4 --keyint 100 --ref 3 --bframes 2 --vbv-bufsize 25000 --vbv-maxrate 20000

I created a preset in Staxrip, you can probably do the same in Handbrake. Play with the CRF value;
18 - 22 is a good place to start, with the higher numbers giving the smaller files.

Thanks - I'll definitely try those settings.

I suppose what I really want is to have really high-quality files, yet without actively cutting down. While that may sound contradictory, what I mean is I don't want any overkill, while at the same time not losing out on any noticeable quality.

[blud7]

--preset veryfast --crf 18

I would advise you use a slow speed and higher CRF, not the other way around.
And really consider 2-pass instead if you want a small, quality encode.
For full HD, 4000 - 6000 kbps is pretty good.
If you are resizing to 720p, 2000-3500 kbps

[edd1234]

Sorry - new question.

When I load a blu-ray in handbrake, and select "High Profile", it gives me two audio tracks. I am aware that one is encoded for compatibility, while the other is a "passthru" or lossless kind of thing.

However what I find strange is that the the source audio is "DTS" or "DTS-HD" 5.1, and the output for the second track is "AC3 Passthru". How is this done - you can't preserve one audio track bit for bit when transferring or converting to a new codec, surely? Having said this, the output file still plays fine in Media Player Classic, even if I remove the first audio track, and just leave the AC3 passthru one in. What's going on??????????

[hello_hello]

I know you said you wanted 1080p, but have you considered resizing? In my opinion, much Bluray video doesn't have 1080p worth of resolution (maybe 1080p worth of noise, but not necessarily 1080p worth of picture detail) and can be resized to 720p without a noticeable quality loss. Especially if the video is noisy and you use a noise filter, as noise filtering tends to be a compromise between noise removal and blurring the picture a little anyway.
I'd resize at least 80% of my Bluray encodes to 720p.

Also, when you resize to 720p, as there's obviously less video to compress, the quality of the compression itself will be higher than a 1080p encode of the same video at the same bitrate. If keeping the file size down is a requirement, I'd prefer to watch a high quality 720p encode than a low quality 1080p one.

CRF encoding is the way to go. The file sizes will vary quite a bit, but you'll no doubt settle on a CRF value which gives you a quality and an average file size you're happy with. For me it's CRF18 for 720p and CRF20 for 1080p. I generally just use the default x264 settings (High Profile for Handbrake), the appropriate x264 tuning, and the medium (or a slower) speed preset, depending on how much of a hurry I'm in.
As no two movies compress the same (hence CRF encoding) I've seen small (around 2GB) encodes which look pretty good (I've even created a few myself using CRF18 when the video was easy to compress), but to me they often look fairly average at 720p and fairly terrible at 1080p. Would the YIFY encodes you refer to generally be 720p or 1080p?

Regarding your DTS/AC3 audio question..... I don't use Handbrake myself, but is it possible the Bluray was ripped with two audio streams? A DTS and an AC3 version? Some will have both. Handbrake might automatically convert the DTS version but not the AC3.

[edd1234]

I know you said you wanted 1080p, but have you considered resizing? In my opinion, much Bluray video doesn't have 1080p worth of resolution (maybe 1080p worth of noise, but not necessarily 1080p worth of picture detail) and can be resized to 720p without a noticeable quality loss. Especially if the video is noisy and you use a noise filter, as noise filtering tends to be a compromise between noise removal and blurring the picture a little anyway.
I'd resize at least 80% of my Bluray encodes to 720p.

Also, when you resize to 720p, as there's obviously less video to compress, the quality of the compression itself will be higher than a 1080p encode of the same video at the same bitrate. If keeping the file size down is a requirement, I'd prefer to watch a high quality 720p encode than a low quality 1080p one.

CRF encoding is the way to go. The file sizes will vary quite a bit, but you'll no doubt settle on a CRF value which gives you a quality and an average file size you're happy with. For me it's CRF18 for 720p and CRF20 for 1080p. I generally just use the default x264 settings (High Profile for Handbrake), the appropriate x264 tuning, and the medium (or a slower) speed preset, depending on how much of a hurry I'm in.
As no two movies compress the same (hence CRF encoding) I've seen small (around 2GB) encodes which look pretty good (I've even created a few myself using CRF18 when the video was easy to compress), but to me they often look fairly average at 720p and fairly terrible at 1080p. Would the YIFY encodes you refer to generally be 720p or 1080p?

Regarding your DTS/AC3 audio question..... I don't use Handbrake myself, but is it possible the Bluray was ripped with two audio streams? A DTS and an AC3 version? Some will have both. Handbrake might automatically convert the DTS version but not the AC3.

You're using CRF 20-18 and getting around 2GB!? All of mine are 8GB minimum, and I've ripped 20 or so blu-rays, so doubt it's just the movies and I doubt that difference is just down to 720p vs 1080p. I have a feeling this all started with one of the newer handbrakes, thinking about it I don't recall my older rips being this big - what version are you using?

[hello_hello]

You're using CRF 20-18 and getting around 2GB!? All of mine are 8GB minimum, and I've ripped 20 or so blu-rays, so doubt it's just the movies and I doubt that difference is just down to 720p vs 1080p. I have a feeling this all started with one of the newer handbrakes, thinking about it I don't recall my older rips being this big - what version are you using?

2GB would be an exception, even for 720p, but I have encoded a movie or two using 720p and CRF 18 and the output file size has been around 2GB. That'd probably be when converting the audio to multi-channel AAC, or maybe keeping the original AC3, but definitely not DTS, which averages around 1GB on it's own.
And it'd depend on the aspect ratio and movie duration. 720p can be 1280x532 or 1280x720 etc, depending on the cropping required, and obviously the more picture there is to encode the greater the file size is likely to be.
If the video is noisy I do sometimes apply noise filtering, so maybe that helps.

If I had to take a guess, my 720p CRF18 encodes with AAC audio would probably average around 4GB. But that's a rough guess as they probably vary between about 2.5GB and 5GB. For 1080p I'd be taking an even bigger guess as I've not encoded a lot at 1080p, but I'll take a stab at 8GB being a rough average (CRF20). 720p v 1080p will make quite a difference to the file size, all else being equal.

I don't use Handbrake, I use MeGUI, but I generally use the default x264 settings with Tune Film, Medium or Slow speed preset, and High Profile 4.1
For Handbrake, it's own High Profile preset and the same x264 tuning and speed preset should give you identical encoder settings.

I have Handbrake installed (current version) and a little while ago I ran a couple of comparison encodes between it and MeGUI due to a discussion in another thread. With the x264 settings the same (no filtering or audio included) encoding speed was pretty much the same for CRF encoding and the final bitrate only differed by about 3Kbps, and that's likely to be because MeGUI uses a slightly newer version of the x264 encoder than Handbrake. I'm running them both on XP.

A couple of days ago I re-encoded a movie to hardcode subtitles and because it was a re-encode of an encode I used CRF16. 1280x558, 90 minutes, AAC audio. It suprised me a little when the final output was only 2.5GB. The original encode with DTS audio was about 4.3GB.

[hello_hello]

However what I find strange is that the the source audio is "DTS" or "DTS-HD" 5.1, and the output for the second track is "AC3 Passthru". How is this done - you can't preserve one audio track bit for bit when transferring or converting to a new codec, surely? Having said this, the output file still plays fine in Media Player Classic, even if I remove the first audio track, and just leave the AC3 passthru one in. What's going on??????????

I converted an MKV containing just MP3 audio with Handbrake today. The High Profile preset defaulted to AAC plus AC3 passthru, although in both cases it showed the source audio as being MP3.

After encoding the logfile said:
"AC3 Passthru requested and input codec is not AC3 for track 2, using AC3 encoder"

It'd be more intuitive, especially seeing as Handbrake's presets like to choose options for you, if "passthu" was disabled for every output type except the one matching the source, or at least if Handbrake's own selection was a little more clever.
As an experiment I tried removing the AAC audio option and selecting "DTS passthru" instead, and as a result the output file had no audio at all.
I guess it's up to the user to compare the input and output choices to make sure they make sense.

Edit: I found an enabled the advanced auto passthrough options, but I can't get them to work. At least not when the source file is an MKV containing DTS audio. No matter what I did, every time I opened the file, Handbrake selected "AC3 Passthru". Maybe I'm missing the obvious.....

[edd1234]

Thanks for all your help.

For now I'm using the default high profile settings, with the following changes (some may only be present in nightlies, not sure.):
-x264 preset: very slow
-RF: 22
-Remove both default audio tracks
-Set the following Audio:
1) DTS-HD ---> AAC (avcodec), Dolby Pro Logic II, 160bitrate, Auto Samplerate (for compatibility)
2) DTS-HD ---> AAC (avcodec), 5.1 Channels, 320bitrate, Auto Samplerate (for our HDMI Media Player)

and it works great - besides for this one movie "Troll Hunter", where the idea of the whole thing is that it's filmed on an amateur camera, so it's really shaky and the file size is nearly 8GB regardless, but I get around 4GB for most things!

[hello_hello]

Do you need two audio streams? Unless you're using a playback device which only supports stereo AAC, and these days there's probably not many aside from some Apple devices (ipod or maybe ipad?), or maybe if you're using a game console as a media player, otherwise it's probably a waste of space.

I generally keep the original AC3 audio if possible, or I convert DTS to multichannel AAC, and everything plays it. Bluray player, the TV's built in media player.... even my Andriod smartphone happily plays it.

[edd1234]

I probably should have said this from the start - the only reason I wanted smaller files was because we have a Network Hard Drive, along with a Network Media Player hooked up to our TV. The media player was struggling to play the 8-10GB files either because the network was too slow, or the device itself is too cheap & chinese.

The extra 300 or so megabytes for an extra audio stream really isn't a problem for me!

[Hoser Rob]

If you're dealing with speed limitations on your networked HD I'd most definitely recommend resizing to 720p. Even if that weren't the case it's a good way to reduce size/bitrate while maintaining good quality.

Remember, most people can't see all the detail on their 1080p screens anyway. At a 9 foot viewing distance, which is the average, you'd need a 70" TV to see all of it.

BTW I've seen some of those yify encodes. I'd categorize them as "good considering the bit rate is too low for the resolution". But high quality video? Nope.

I've never seen a really high quality 720p encode of a feature film that was much less than 2Gb. But it can be done with judicious use of advanced h.264 parameters, which is another bucket of worms. This is where crf encoding really starts to look good. It's at least as good per se as 2 pass bit rate, and you can use advanced settings ... which will increase encoding time a lot ... in a much more reasonable time than with 2 pass.

[yoda313]

and you can use advanced settings

Just an fyi once you move beyond presets hardware players start to choke on video files. If they aren't "just so" they don't like them.

Now if you are streaming and doing dlna stuff it might not matter as much.

But still if you are reencoding from a "preset" file keep the preset file for hardware players.

But you really should be encoding from your original source anyway to get the best quality of course.

[hello_hello]

I'm still trying to reconcile a statement of being able to create high quality 720p movie encodes under 2GB through the judicious use of advanced h.264 parameters with an admission of never having seen one. It's seems like a logical paradox to me.
Not to mention if it's possible, each movie is different, so I'd imagine a judicious use of advanced h.264 parameters would require an equally judicious use of time consuming trail and error.

[edd1234]

Converted a blu-ray "The Host", on High Profile, but changed the RF to 22, and set x264 to "very slow", with two aac audio tracks - one Dolby Pro Logic II and one 5.1 Channels. The video stream itself was only 1.26GB, and it was a 2hr movie, yet the quality is impeccable.

On another note I applied the same settings to "Troll Hunter" and it took a good few hours more, and came out around 7GB, so I suppose the movie itself really does matter!

For all those who are saying "720p, 720p!!", while I'm sure you're right, and can very much believe a high-quality 720p encode looks far better than a lower 1080p equivalent, I can't quite bring myself to cut out all those extra pixels, whether or not they really matter. Sorry

Thanks for all the help everyone.

[hello_hello]

On another note I applied the same settings to "Troll Hunter" and it took a good few hours more, and came out around 7GB, so I suppose the movie itself really does matter!

Possibly the complexity of the picture itself, or at least the amount it changes from frame to frame, would effect encoding time. I can't say I've thought about that too much.

For all those who are saying "720p, 720p!!", while I'm sure you're right, and can very much believe a high-quality 720p encode looks far better than a lower 1080p equivalent, I can't quite bring myself to cut out all those extra pixels, whether or not they really matter. Sorry

The way I decide (as I use an AVIsynth based encoder GUI) is to create a script for encoding which doesn't resize and another which does. Sometimes I'll duplicate those with and without noise filtering etc. Then I open each script with MPC-HC and run them maximised on my TV so I can switch between them. If there's no real difference between 720p and 1080p I'll go with 720p. I tend to use a soft resizer with MPC-HC so the resizing back to 1080p doesn't sharpen the 720p version.
You can't do the same with Handbrake, but you could run a couple of encodes of just a small section of each video to compare them. Use a very low CRF value (ie around CRF16) so when you do you're not also comparing differences in compression.

And of course there's no law which says you have to use 1080p or 720p. A couple of times (cropping aside) I've compromised and gone with 1600x900 (or 900p).

[Hoser Rob]

... or all those who are saying "720p, 720p!!", while I'm sure you're right, and can very much believe a high-quality 720p encode looks far better than a lower 1080p equivalent, I can't quite bring myself to cut out all those extra pixels, whether or not they really matter. Sorry

Thanks for all the help everyone.

What's the point of answering questions by dolts whose eyes glaze over if you don''t tell them what you want to hear?

[jagabo]

For now I'm using the default high profile settings, with the following changes (some may only be present in nightlies, not sure.):
-x264 preset: very slow
-RF: 22

You probably won't notice a quality difference between veryslow and veryfast unless you look at enlarged still frames. You will definitely see a difference in encoding time though (around 20x). And veryfast will probably deliver a smaller file. After your veryslow conversion is done, make another with veryfast and compare for yourself.

[edd1234]

... or all those who are saying "720p, 720p!!", while I'm sure you're right, and can very much believe a high-quality 720p encode looks far better than a lower 1080p equivalent, I can't quite bring myself to cut out all those extra pixels, whether or not they really matter. Sorry

Thanks for all the help everyone.

What's the point of answering questions by dolts whose eyes glaze over if you don''t tell them what you want to hear?

In my answer I acknowledged that you and the others who had suggested 720p were right, which IMO is very far from having "my eyes glaze over", and I gave my reasons why, as seemingly stupid to you as they are. I don't need super compact 2gb encodes - I just don't want the 10gb ones either, hence, I didn't feel the need to cut down to 720p.

You can't suddenly dismiss people who don't take your guidance to the letter as "dolts", especially when they take the time to appreciate its merits, and give their own reasons for having a different opinion, however stupid they may seem to you.

[edd1234]

For now I'm using the default high profile settings, with the following changes (some may only be present in nightlies, not sure.):
-x264 preset: very slow
-RF: 22

You probably won't notice a quality difference between veryslow and veryfast unless you look at enlarged still frames. You will definitely see a difference in encoding time though (around 20x). And veryfast will probably deliver a smaller file. After your veryslow conversion is done, make another with veryfast and compare for yourself.

Very slow does seem to make much more compressed files for me, not sure about quality. Will do a test to make sure!

And yes, very slow is about 3-5hrs, while the faster presets for me start at about an hour.

[jagabo]

Very slow does seem to make much more compressed files for me, not sure about quality. Will do a test to make sure!

I've done many many comparisons of veryslow and veryfast (and most of the other presets) and rarely (usually with anime or cartoons) does veryslow give significantly more compression than veryfast. If you zoom into still shots you'll see veryfast gives rougher edges on moving objects and more loss of low contrast fine grain detail. The latter can lead to a little more posterization during normal playback, especially in dark areas. I ussualy work around CRF=18.

[hogger129]

Thanks for the fast reply.

Size isn't my main concern - I was hoping for blu-ray rips about 4gb or less, 1080p and that didn't have any noticeable lack of quality - meaning you'd have a hard time telling the encode and blu-ray apart.

From what I've heard it's better to set an RF Value and let the computer manage the bitrate, than try and set it yourself, although I don't know much about it and may be very wrong about that.

It's a tradeoff. Any time you compress, there is going to be some loss in quality. You just have to find a happy medium.

[hello_hello]

I've done many many comparisons of veryslow and veryfast (and most of the other presets) and rarely (usually with anime or cartoons) does veryslow give significantly more compression than veryfast. If you zoom into still shots you'll see veryslow gives rougher edges on moving objects and more loss of low contrast fine grain detail. The latter can lead to a little more posterization during normal playback, especially in dark areas. I ussualy work around CRF=18.

Co-incidentally, I was reading a thread over at doom9 where someone specifically asked about rougher edges on moving objects when encoding anime. Like many doom9 threads, it was closed by a moderator who can't stand being disagreed with and/or disapproves of discussions taking place in a discussion forum, but the poster there was asking why --b-adapt 1 looks better than --b-adapt 2. Which made me wonder whether the difference between veryslow and veryfast might be simply --b-adapt 1 vs --b-adapt 2. Any thoughts?

So when encoding amine, I assume you use a faster preset in preference to a slower one? What about film/video? Any preferences for an x264 speed preset? I tried some comparison encodes between medium, slow and slower a while back, and at CRF 18 I couldn't see any real difference between them, which made me wonder why I'd bother with a slower speed preset, although I only ran some quick test encodes, nothing from which I'd draw definitive conclusions just yet.

[jagabo]

I've done many many comparisons of veryslow and veryfast (and most of the other presets) and rarely (usually with anime or cartoons) does veryslow give significantly more compression than veryfast. If you zoom into still shots you'll see veryslow gives rougher edges on moving objects and more loss of low contrast fine grain detail. The latter can lead to a little more posterization during normal playback, especially in dark areas. I ussualy work around CRF=18.

Co-incidentally, I was reading a thread over at doom9 where someone specifically asked about rougher edges on moving objects when encoding anime. Like many doom9 threads, it was closed by a moderator who can't stand being disagreed with and/or disapproves of discussions taking place in a discussion forum, but the poster there was asking why --b-adapt 1 looks better than --b-adapt 2. Which made me wonder whether the difference between veryslow and veryfast might be simply --b-adapt 1 vs --b-adapt 2. Any thoughts?

So when encoding amine, I assume you use a faster preset in preference to a slower one? What about film/video? Any preferences for an x264 speed preset? I tried some comparison encodes between medium, slow and slower a while back, and at CRF 18 I couldn't see any real difference between them, which made me wonder why I'd bother with a slower speed preset, although I only ran some quick test encodes, nothing from which I'd draw definitive conclusions just yet.

I mistyped that post. I meant to say that veryfast had rougher edges etc. I just fixed it in the original post. Sorry for the confusion that created. Adding --b-adapt=2 to veryfast does seem to fix up the edges somewhat. Attached is a cropped sample showing some edges that get rough with veryfast. Adding --b-adapt=2 to veryfast does clean up most of those rough edges.

I usually encode at CRF 18. DVD rips with the slow preset -- because I don't do a lot of them these days and I figure blowing the small frame up to full screen on a big screen will make defects more noticeable. And with my current computer 20 to 30 minutes to encode a movie is fine with me. I'll use a tuning parameter if appropriate, or --aq-mode=2 --aq-strength=1.8 if the source has a lot of grain.

[blud7]

BTW I checked. YIFI or whoever uses 2 pass, just fyi.

[morganfj]

Don't care for HANDBRAKE I use FREEMAKE (Free Converter but I donated $3 for Black Bar Removal) ...
****** Example of dREDUCE VIDEO FILE SIZE using "Freemake Video Converter" at Bottom of this Blog!

So how do we scale down?

SCALE DOWN YOUR VIDEO to a size Closer to YIFI and keep good quality by simply reducing NOT JUST Bit-rate but Frame Size.
I have found Crazy Frame Size and Rates on some video.. really a Frame rate over over 3000 and Sizes of 2560X1440 or larger?????
You need an 64inch or larger TV Refreshing at 120 or 240Hz. to even POSSIBLE see a difference for most of these and even then you may not see it!!!
Most of use use something like a 32" Refreshing at 60hz. (FYI SUGGESTION -If you really Want HD Quality Buy your next TV with 240Hz Refresh!!! - Watching take a bit to get use to.. Normal Video looks almost like everything is Live Set...)
I myself love movies, want a decent quality and small size since I store literally ALL MY VIDEO on Hard Drive.. At the Typical 1.2 to 4Gb Video Size you see now .. A simple conversion can add easily 3 TIMES the movies on your Hard Drive in the same space!!!!

Lets Start with ---
BIT RATE:
If you Want Exceptional HD Keep High Bit Rate -- But note this adds Drastically to //file Size..!!!!!
I have found most 720p Videos will convert well around 800-900bps and maintains good quality even at 700bps for old Non HD DVDs or BW videos this works fine.
For 1080 try to keep it 900 to 1200bps again works fine for conversion for smaller size... Again this depends on the TV quality (Refresh/Size and Definition 720/1080 etc..) I have notice some 1080 files work fine at 900bps.

NEXT
FRAME SIZE is the other KILLER no one talks about... Ever start a movie and the Video is only about 1/2 the Screen size until you hit the "Full Screen" Button AND OTHERS fill your screen instantly... Well this is the Frame Size the video was converted too.. In reality you want a Size equal to your Monitor/TV if you have a Phone 720X480 Screen anything larger is just ADDED file Size... So either Convert to 1080 or 720 sizes... NOTE that even a 1080 video is not any alway noticeably different on some TVs than a 720... So convert according to your viewing situation..

Frame Size -- The Frame Size DRAMATICALLY effects your video Size.. You do not need 1080p if you watch Video on a Androild or iPad 320x480 would work fine. You want to keep quality high Match your screen size as closee as possible.. But for many requiring Good Video and Small size.. you can easily half you size in most cases..
Standards are... and Suggested Reductions for SIZE:
2560X1440 -- 1440p --> Reduce to 960X540 (divide 2.6666666...) or 720X400
1920X1080 -- 1080p/i --> Reduce to 720X405
1280X720 -- 720p -- > Reduce to 640X360 (I usually do not Reduce unless DVD quality)
Additional Odd Size:
1920X800 -- 1080? --> Reduce to 720X480

Converting to the Reduces size above still Gives Good Results and with Bitrate(Talked About Below) reduction should result in 700Mb to 1.2G depending on the Video.

If you want Videos at Highest Definition on your Monitor then the Above is your standards - Convert to the closes size matching your TV/Monitors Stand Size!!!!
Movies DO NOT always matching your Monitor size.. Lets face if many WideScreen Movies require a Black Bar Above and Below... And due to different viewing sizes some files are converted for larger screens... I have seen 9-15Gb uploads that are for Projection Viewing... You will find many scaled much larger than your monitor! This is good for uploads and allows everyone to view at high quality. But to reduce file size, try to keep the Width Setting of conversion as close to your Screens Width Size and Scale Height PROPORTIONAL to original Width/Height of file... If you want a bit lowers and smaller File Size - Try the Reductions in chart above.

Other Concerns???

AUDIO:
Never spoken of but anyone with a MP3 collection knows how much size is effected by Bit Rate ... Bitrate is the number of bits that are conveyed or processed per unit of time, in audio it is per-second.
A good sounding Song at 340bps can sound the same at 128bps and cut the MP3 size by more than half -- sometime much more!!!!
Standards are Moderate - 128 to 160bps High is 192bps with everything above considered Highest (Reality.. above 192 you need detection equipment to tell the difference though you will hear people tell you different)
I use 128bps for Stereo in all my files!

LIKEWISE:
Sample Rate is the recording speed of the 0/1's used in Binary to record sound.. Sample rate effects size smaller than Bitrate. The industy standard id 44,100 Hz.. I have noticed that this make the best sample for me with detail in music. Of course old Audio like in old BW movies can easily sound the same at half this rate! I suggest keeping 441000 myself.

ALSO
Surround Sound or Dolby Audio 5.0 Adds Additional Track (2 or more)... 2 additional track for rear speaker is 2Xmore file!
If you only use Stereo, you only need 2 tracks.... !
For those using Stereo.. always Change Audio Conversion Settings to Stereo!!!

*************** EXAMPLE ***********************

************************************************** ************************************************** **

----- CONVERSION OF VIDEO USING FREEMAKE (FREE) VIDEO CONVERTER -----

Download Freemake (Free).. Add your Video.. then select MP4 then scroll down to CUSTOM m.. Then select AC3/.H264...
OK here is a bit complicated so follow closely...
-- Right Click on your video file and select PROPERTIES .
-- Now on you Freemake Custom Tab.. CLICK the Gear Icon:

AUDIO
-- Audio - Channels=Stereo - Sample Rate=44100 - Bit Rate= 128 or 112
CODEC
Video Codec=.H264 Frame Rate=23.976 or 24 Bit Rate=700 to 900
-- Select DETAILS tab... Right Down "Frame Size" and Bit-rate

FRAME SIZE
.. Your Frame Width is 720 or below on file. Make it the same for both Width and Height.
.. First check if your Frame size matches any of the sizes in Drop Down Selection.
If You can not find the size select CUSTOM .. (Width and Height must be keep in proportion to keep Black Bars Off conversion)
- Your Frame Width is 720 or below on file.. Select Original
- You may also check if your Frame size matches any of the sizes in Drop Down Selection.
- Your Frame Width is Giant like 1920 Lower it to scale (these must be proportional to file)
i.e.
-- Use Chart Above or:
- 1920X1080 scales down to 720X400 (divided both by 2.66666)
- 1920X800 Scales down to 720X480 (or for HD 1280X600)
Usually you can divid by 2 to get a smaller size or 2.6666 for wide screen.

THIS Conversion WILL DRAMATICALLY Reduce your Video Size Closer to those of YIFI
and after all.. why send a GIANT File for really poor Video lite this Upload?

FYI for about a $3+ Donation Freemake (Free Converter) will Remove Black Bars for another Similar Donation they add Subtitle Tool..
Thanks to All

FJM