VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date: Aug 2009
    Location: Planet Earth
    Search Comp PM
    I want to get the best quality
    Attached Images  
    Quote Quote  
  2. I'm a MEGA Super Moderator Baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date: Aug 2000
    Location: Sweden
    Search Comp PM
    Constant quality and set the quality to 1. The file will be huge though...
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date: Aug 2009
    Location: Planet Earth
    Search Comp PM
    What about these options?

    Name:  megui.jpg
Views: 295
Size:  87.2 KB
    Quote Quote  
  4. I don't think you understand what he means when he says "The file will be huge though". It will be 10 to 100 times larger than whatever you're starting with, unless you're starting with uncompressed video.

    Which resizer to use depends on your source and your tastes. Sharper filters give a sharper picture but can create more artifacts, enhance noise, and require more bitrate. Less sharp filters give a less sharp picture, create less artifacts, reduce noise, and require less bitrate.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date: Sep 2012
    Location: Australia
    Search Comp PM
    The presets tend to already use the best settings, why did you think they wouldn't? Use tune film for live action video and CGI and tune animation for cell animation. Never shift away from high profile, the only reason to use anything else is for compatibility with old devices. If you're still using one of those devices you probably shouldn't be all that worried about quality anyway. The level should be 3.1 for SD content or 4.1 for HD. 3.2 can be useful if you've done a double rate de-interlacing while removing anamorphic on SD content but I doubt you'll be doing that. Other than that the constant quality CRF or multi-pass bitrate is generally where all the 'quality' in an encoding comes from. It would be nice if there really were some wondrous settings that would blow all those lesser encodes out of the water, but the fact is the defaults do a pretty good job balancing speed and quality. The fact is, you can throw masses of CPU power at an encode but there's a point where no matter how much processing power you throw at it, all X264 can so is make 'different' decisions rather than better ones. And if you really are all that obsessed with imaginary quality, don't resize at all, especially not with those kind of resizers. Unless you're encoding from Blu Rays it's most likely whatever you're encoding was screwed before you even got to it and there's no point in fussing over them.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member PuzZLeR's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Toronto Canada
    Search Comp PM
    I've been using --crf 18.0, for pretty much everything I encode with x264, for many, many years now, which has always been IMO a good sweet spot for high quality and decent file sizes. I'd say this is a good start while you tweak other settings to your taste.
    I hate VHS. I always did.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member
    Join Date: Sep 2012
    Location: Australia
    Search Comp PM
    Damn, I was going to say that but was too busy ranting. Standard choices for CRF range from about 14 to 24 and yes, 18 is a good place to start, it's where I started actually... Ah memories.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member
    Join Date: Jan 2012
    Location: Budapest
    Search Comp PM
    The correct answer is: Placebo
    Quote Quote