the best future proof format

[Surfdude1982]

Hi all!

I'm a newbie in videoland.

Want to convert 30-40 VHS cassettes with family movies to a digital format.
What is the best ouput format (think I will use a canopus ADVC)? I would prefer not to loose quality while editing.
Wat is the best future proof format to save the original and edited movies in?

Thx!
Johan

[ndjamena]

There's no such thing a future proof video file. Save a master copy somewhere with either an extremely high bitrate or lossless codec then make copies from that as they're needed, MPEG2 or H.264 should be around for a while, PCM is the best long term strategy for audio. As long as you can retrieve the elemental streams container should be irrelevant but programs like FFMPEG should always be able to read from pretty much any container for as long as they exist. No one can really answer this question because no one can predict the future. All my videos are sourced from DVDs and Blu Ray so I just keep the original rips in MKV form which are the highest quality versions I'll ever have anyway.

[pandy]

I would go for lossless H.264 in 10 bit + FLAC for audio, mp4 container. But if this is something else than archiving - regular consumer format - perhaps H.264 (point resize x2 @ HP@4.1) + AC3 (with insane high bitrate like 512kbps for stereo) - container TS (mpeg transport stream) or mp4.

[jman98]

I have to disagree with pandy's advice in some spots. ndjamena's suggestion of PCM for audio is better than pandy's AC3 suggestion and there's no reason to use MP4 containers with their inherent limitations when MKV will work fine and be supported for a long time to come. I'm not pandy's favorite person so he's likely to view this as some kind of personal attack on him, which it isn't. It's just that in this case I think ndjamena's got better advice, but if you did what pandy said you certainly wouldn't be screwed. FLAC is basically a compressed version of PCM so using FLAC instead of PCM to save a little space is fine as pandy suggested, but there's no real reason to use AC3.

The original poster might keep in mind that MPEG-1 video has been around since the early 1990s I think and it's still supported and all of the suggestions ndjamena and pandy provided are likely to be supported still 20 years from now, but MP4 offers you ZERO advantages at all over MKV and it has some limitations that MKV doesn't so there's no compelling reason to use it.

[jagabo]

If the OP is capturing with a Canopus ADVC device he should just archive the DV AVI file. Talk of lossless codecs is nonsensical. For viewing, use DVD.

[pandy]

MKV is not supported by many HW players (where MP4 and TS are supported). IMHO PCM support is same level as FLAC support (but FLAC provide some compression thus why not use it?) - video... personally after last changes i would prefer FFV but i assume it is not stable as H.264 in terms of specification - so for archiving or MP4 or TS (but not sure about FLAC support on TS) - btw ALAC as Apple decided to go open and royalty free seem to be a good alternative for FLAC .
AC3 provide highest compatibility with reasonable decent quality (with use of widely available free tools - personally i would prefer AAC but AAC may be not supported by some HW and encoders are really long and complex story - licenses etc in open source world).

And finally probably jagabo have right and this ends whole discussion...

OT:

MPEG-1 is OK and i like it (due support for higher resolution than on MPEG-2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-1#Resolution.2FBitrate ) but have to many limitations - progressive only (can live with this), lack of modern, good encoders (this is big issue, QUENC is slightly old and not actively maintained).

I'm not pandy's favorite person so he's likely to view this as some kind of personal attack on him, which it isn't.

First this is not true - even if i have clashes (with for example usually quiet as We see frequently problems from 2 completely different points and He is almost constantly on position "i need this now and in a way i like and you are stupid as your English is far from perfect") then generally i never consider anyone in terms: "i don't like him" or "not favorite person" - so jman98 i have nothing against You.

Second i see that we discussing so i didn't consider differences in arguments as personal attack...

[Cornucopia]

@pandy, LPCM is nearly universally supported, not true with FLAC. I wish it were true for FLAC, but alas.

@Surfdud1982, it all depends on what you mean by "future proof". In a strict literal sense like ndjamena mentioned, nothing is future proof.
However, given the way that most companies are building in backward-compatibility of (successful) formats, it makes sense to go with a format that has already achieved great success, popularity & ubiquity.

So then it is a matter of: what is appropriate for editing vs. viewing vs. archiving. They're all different needs and NO one format is going to fully satisfy all those needs simultaneously. Which is why different codecs are available.

So my suggestion is:
Since VHS is already on the low side of SD quality, you don't want to skimp on bitrate (even if/when using a more efficient codec). And, since it sounds like you are planning on doing at least some editing and don't want to lose quality in the process, you need to - at least during the editing - use an Intra-frame codec.
You have a wide choice of: Uncompressed, Losslessly-compressed (Lagarith, HuffYUV, UTvideo, MSU, etc), nearly-losslessly-compressed (Cineform, DNxHD, ProRes), or DV, MJPEG, Mpeg1-Iframe, Mpeg2-Iframe, Mpeg4-Iframe, AVC-Intra, or even HEVC-Intra. The order I wrote those in is roughly the order of increasing efficiency (and partly in complexity). So the last are much more compressed than the first. But let's back up a minute...
There is nothing stopping you from doing what most pros & semi-pros do: edit & master in one format, view/distribute in another format, and transfer/archive in possibly a 3rd format (or if not, use the edit format). All those compression efficiencies really come into play when NOT using just Intra-frame, but rather using Inter-frame compression as well. So the viewing, can take advantage of this, but not the editing so much.
Getting back to it...
I suggest transfer & edit & master using DV. It is easily good enough for home movies' quality, even with 4:1:1 colorspace, and it is much more than the resolution of VHS. You can edit losslessly back to DV, because nearly all NLEs will smartrender DV material. An alternate might be MPEG2-Iframe (at equivalent ~25Mbps bitrate as DV). Many NLEs can also smartrender it and it uses the more common 4:2:0 colorspace.
If chromakey and/or color-grading/correcting is important to you, you could upconvert to a lossless or near-lossless codec and edit with those (which should smartrender on many NLEs). Or, if you REALLY needed the very pinnacle of every last quality you could eek out of your VHS master, you could transfer & edit uncompressed or lossless. It just didn't sound like that was your bag.
After finishing up your edits, I would make a "family/consumer viewing copy" in AVC-in-MP4 (as that is common to most modern devices) or MPEG1 (as that is common to most old and new devices).
On the audio side, it's easy: keep it as LPCM (aka WAV/AIFF) from start to near finish. Only at the very end when making the "family/consumer viewing copy", should you incorporate AAC-in-MP4 or MP2-in-MPEG1.

And then, when archiving: archive the original transfers (DV or MPEG2), plus edted master, plus the fam/cons viewing copy.

Scott

[Surfdude1982]

Hi guys,

I would really like to thank you for all your comments! They are very valuable!

Now I have to decide if I will do the capturing myself or pay a professional.
What would you advice me? I read it's better to use a standalone TBC (link). But borrowing is apparently not an option. Buying is too expensive (+-700 euro). And then I also need a converter.

Thanks
Johan

[friendly_jacek]

i was going to ask the same question as the OP asked, but found this thread in a search. my initial plan was to archive as interlaced MPEG2 (DVDs) but then had some other ideas like highly compressed deinterlaced MPEG4 on hard drives or similar digital media. sounds like MPEG2/DVD is still a good option, right? in addition, i can still do the compressed files as "viewing/streaming copy" i guess.

And then, when archiving: archive the original transfers (DV or MPEG2), plus edted master, plus the fam/cons viewing copy.

[theewizard]

mp4 does have an advantage over MKV (well something i consider an advantage)
a defined set of standards of what CAN BE used for video and audio encoding formats, data, etc..

MKV is very forgiving, you put almost anything into an mkv container (pkg)
but that does not mean the person wanting to view it, will be able too

and its certainly not what i would consider an editing format

[hello_hello]

i was going to ask the same question as the OP asked, but found this thread in a search. my initial plan was to archive as interlaced MPEG2 (DVDs) but then had some other ideas like highly compressed deinterlaced MPEG4 on hard drives or similar digital media. sounds like MPEG2/DVD is still a good option, right? in addition, i can still do the compressed files as "viewing/streaming copy" i guess.

If it's interlaced, it'd be a good idea to use full frame rate de-interlacing when re-enncoding. 50fps progressive for PAL and 60fps for NTSC. That's normally how the video would be de-interlaced on playback, and motion will look much smoother than de-interlacing to 25fps or 30fps.

If you want to be extremely enthusiastic, QTGMC is a very high quality de-interlacer for Avisynth. It'll generally de-interlace to a higher quality than the hardware will de-interlace the original video on playback.

If you're using a more straightforward GUI such as Handbrake for converting, it's double frame rate de-interlacing is called "bob" de-interlacing.

[glenpinn]

If the OP is capturing with a Canopus ADVC device he should just archive the DV AVI file. Talk of lossless codecs is nonsensical. For viewing, use DVD.

This is exactly the method i employed, the Canopus ADVC device was a great tool, not sure which model i used, maybe the 110 along with a TBC device as well.

Anyway, just used WinDV to transfer from the tape in the camera to the computer in DvAvi, retained the original tapes, edited the DvAvi and output to mpeg2, then Author it to dvd for those who wanted it on dvd.

I also used to transfer the edited DvAvi back to Mini DV Tape for archiving, as well as keep the original, along with the mpeg2 file on my Hard drives.

All my mpeg2 family videos (about 300 of them) i have now converted to mp4.

and there's no reason to use MP4 containers with their inherent limitations when MKV will work fine and be supported for a long time to come.

So what makes MKV better than MP4, reason for asking is that years ago everyone raved about MKV and that it was far better than MP4, BUT, as i found out the hard way, every time i plugged a usb drive into the usb on a HD tv, or into some of those hard drive based media players, they would never support MKV, only MP4, so i have continued with MP4 ever since.

Now days i am pretty certain MKV is supported on all hard drive based media players, and i have a Western Digital Live media player connected to all 4 HD TV's in my home and they do support MKV, i just use MP4 because of its versatility and support.

I also output my current 1080/50p MTS camera files to 1080/50p MP4 as well, using the unlocked x264 encoder in my VRD Pro.

[jagabo]

So what makes MKV better than MP4

It's a mixed bag. MP4 is controlled by Apple. As with all things Apple, their major interest is supporting as little as possible to minimize the amount of work they have to do. MKV's goal is to be more flexible. But along with that flexibility comes addition difficulty in dealing with it.

[glenpinn]

So what makes MKV better than MP4

It's a mixed bag. MP4 is controlled by Apple. As with all things Apple, their major interest is supporting as little as possible to minimize the amount of work they have to do. MKV's goal is to be more flexible. But along with that flexibility comes addition difficulty in dealing with it.

Thank you, yes the "dealing" with it was a problem years ago as it was not a fully supported playback container like MP4 was, but for me, MP4 hs never given me any issues what so ever, so i guess that is why i continue to use it, because it "works" on any device.

Bit like h264 and x264, if i edit a 1080/50p MTS file and smart render that to1080/50p using the VRD h264 encoder, it averages around a 24Mbps (same as the source file) but if i smart render using the unlocked x264 encoder in my profile, it does it at around 20Mbps, supposedly the same quality, with a smaller file size.

May not seem like much difference in file size, but after a few years it would soon adds up if you are shooting the amount of video that i do.

[hello_hello]

So what makes MKV better than MP4

MKVMergeGUI. Well, that and the fact MKV is far more versatile, but lots of it's to do with MKVMergeGUI for me. It makes creating/muxing MKVs easy. On the odd occasion I need to mux an MP4 I try to take a sedative in advance.

reason for asking is that years ago everyone raved about MKV and that it was far better than MP4, BUT, as i found out the hard way, every time i plugged a usb drive into the usb on a HD tv, or into some of those hard drive based media players, they would never support MKV, only MP4, so i have continued with MP4 ever since.

It should be a lot different now. The oldest TV/Bluray player with a built in media player in this house is about 4 years old, and they'll happily play MKVs. DivX HD uses the MKV container so Divx certified devices should also be fine. Well, they might have bitrate limits and not support as many types of audio as non-DivX certified devices, but they do support MKV. I'm not sure about Apple devices and MKV. Probably not, without a third party player.

I also output my current 1080/50p MTS camera files to 1080/50p MP4 as well, using the unlocked x264 encoder in my VRD Pro.

If someone gives me an MP4, or I obtain one, I don't copy it to a hard drive. I open it with MKVMergeGUI and save it's output to a hard drive instead.

[glenpinn]

On the odd occasion I need to mux an MP4 I try to take a sedative in advance.

Not following you on this comment, can you elaborate re the sedative bit ?

If someone gives me an MP4, or I obtain one, I don't copy it to a hard drive. I open it with MKVMergeGUI and save it's output to a hard drive instead.

Again not sure what you mean here, why do you have this thing about MP4 files, and are you changing it to an MKV with MKVMergeGUI ?

[ron spencer]

come on guys....mkv's problems ended 5 yrs ago...everything plays them. Nothing has issues...if your hardware does, get rid of it.

Save to MKV, then if you need mp4 later, use handbrake to re-encode to your iwhatever device


you'll be fine.

[jagabo]

come on guys....mkv's problems ended 5 yrs ago...everything plays them.

Apple TV? PS3? PS4? Xbox? Xbox360? Even Windows didn't support MKV natively until Win10.

[hello_hello]

On the odd occasion I need to mux an MP4 I try to take a sedative in advance.

Not following you on this comment, can you elaborate re the sedative bit ?

Some MP4 muxers, such as MP4Box, seem to be a bit buggy. And slow. MyMP4Box GUI doesn't even seem willing to create an MP4 containing only audio. I use Video To Video Converter for MP4 muxing when I need to..... or more accurately for muxing AAC into an m4a, but for some reason I first need to mux the AAC as an mka with MKVMergeGUI, then the mka will remux as m4a, because direct AAC to m4a muxing is a bit flaky, Maybe I shouldn't be lazy and use the command line. Video To Video converter uses ffmpeg to do the muxing, but it hasn't been updated in quite a while.

If someone gives me an MP4, or I obtain one, I don't copy it to a hard drive. I open it with MKVMergeGUI and save it's output to a hard drive instead.

Again not sure what you mean here, why do you have this thing about MP4 files, and are you changing it to an MKV with MKVMergeGUI ?

Yes. Remuxing as MKV. Mainly I'll admit, because I'm a bit OCD about having "clean" files. No streams I don't need, the correct language set for each stream ect..... it's fairly easy using MKVMergeGUI. It's not so much that I have a thing against MP4 files, it's just that MKVMergeGUI will open lots of file types, easily let you select the streams to keep, and remux as MKV without any hassle.
Admittedly I don't work with MP4 muxers much, so maybe that's why much of the time when I do there seems to be one problem or another to sort out, although there's no real MP4 equivalent of MKVCleaver or gMKVExtractGUI that I know of either. I also use MeGUI a fair bit, and it can extract the audio from MKVs but not MP4s. It's HD DVD-Bluray Streams Extractor (eac3to) won't open MP4s either.
Plus.... much of the time when I'm re-encoding video I keep the original audio, so I encode the video via Avisynth, open the encoded version with MKVMergeGUI, add the source file, deselect the original video stream, remux...... no need to spend time extracting the rest of the streams from the source file first.... it's pretty easy with MKVMergeGUI but MP4 muxing doesn't tend to be quite as trouble free. At least not in my experience, but then again, I don't do much of it.

[glenpinn]

come on guys....mkv's problems ended 5 yrs ago...everything plays them. Nothing has issues...if your hardware does, get rid of it.

MP4 had better support than MKV back in the day, but you forget one very simple thing here.

A lot of people who have an older 768p or 1080p HD TV will (or should) have MP4 support, but definately not MKV, and some people will have hard drive based media players that do not support MKV, should these people get rid of these devices and upgrade just to have MKV support, when i can give the the exact same thing in MP4, no i don't think so, and for why, its just a waste of money.

That's like me upgrading to a 4k camera to shoot all my videos with, i'm not going to tell everyone that i am only going to give out the 4k videos, and if your TV or media player won't play it, get rid of it and upgrade.

No, i like to be more versatile by offering people their videos in various formats that will not only suit their current needs, but also their needs into the future, but not everyone feels the need to upgrade their TV's or payback devices when they can still get their content in the formats that their current hardware will support.

With 4k video, i want to be able to edit the original 4k files (most likely XAVC-S @ 150Mbps) into the finished product, save one copy as a 4k MP4, and then output another copy at 1080p MP4 at whatever my editing software encodes it to (usually it will be 1/4 the bitrate of the 4k file)

By doing this, and giving people a copy in both 4k and 1080p, it offers those people who already have 4k supported hardware a 4k video to play, as well as a 1080p version to play on any 1080p TV they might have, and for those who currently do not have 4k support in their home, they can play the 1080p MP4, and keep the 4k video to play if they do decide to upgrate to 4k some time in the future.

At the moment with my 1080/50p camera videos, i edit the MTS files, output to 1080/50p MP4, then another copy at 720/50p MP4 at half the bitrate, and everyone gets a copy of both, so if their current TV or hardware does not support 1080/50p content, they can play the 720/50p video.

It might seem a bit extravagant, but that is the way i do things for people that i shoot video for, i cater for what they have today, and offer an alternative for what they might have into the future, and i cannot see MP4 being cast aside for a long time yet, certainly not with TV's and playback hardware devices, so for me, while ever there is support for MP4, that is the container i will be using.

Oh, btw, how come many new cameras are now shooting high bitrate 1080p and 4k video inside an MP4 container and not MKV ?????

Save to MKV, then if you need mp4 later, use handbrake to re-encode to your whatever device

Why, just save as an MP4 from the start, and if i was to convert from MP4 to MKV, my VRD software does not re-encode the file, it simply Smart Renders it very quickly, simply by swapping containers.

Oddly, when i used to get MKV files a few years ago, i always converted them over to MP4, just a force of habit.

[theewizard]

If someone gives me an MP4, or I obtain one, I don't copy it to a hard drive. I open it with MKVMergeGUI and save it's output to a hard drive instead.

i do just the opposite, i convert MKV to MP4
usually i do it with DVDFab, which is quite happy to do so with no problems
i always seem to have problem with MKVgui
and avidemux does not like mkv files, even the newest version gives me errors if i try to remux an MKV file

No camera i know off, records in MKV
so why take a camera recording and mux it into mkv ? makes no sense to me
the only advantage to mkv is it will let you do things, that other containers don't
but a recording in MP4 is already in a standard audio and video codecs and format
why change to non-standard formats, you can't gain any quality, you might save a few bites of space
but that has more to do with the codec used in the re-encode than in the wrapper/container

[hello_hello]

Oh, btw, how come many new cameras are now shooting high bitrate 1080p and 4k video inside an MP4 container and not MKV ?????

I don't understand how the various containers work all that well, but MP4 is an ISO base format, and I suspect that means it's easier for editing programs to open MP4s and navigate frame accurately than it would be for MKV. If so, it'd follow the files created by recording devices would tend to be editing program friendly.

As a possible example, the L-Smash decoder can open MP4s using LSMASHVideoSource() in an Avisynth script without indexing them first. For MKV it needs to create an index file. If I'm on the right track, not needing to index can be quite an advantage. Indexing large files takes a while, especially if the files contain multiple audio streams and they all need to be indexed.

[hello_hello]

No camera i know off, records in MKV
so why take a camera recording and mux it into mkv ? makes no sense to me
the only advantage to mkv is it will let you do things, that other containers don't....

There's one reason......
Why do you do it the other way around?

but a recording in MP4 is already in a standard audio and video codecs and format
why change to non-standard formats, you can't gain any quality, you might save a few bites of space
but that has more to do with the codec used in the re-encode than in the wrapper/container

I'd argue that MKV support is pretty close to being as standard as MP4 support. Unless you use certain Apple devices.
And I use tools such as MKVCleaver quite a bit. It makes it easier to extract streams if they're already inside an MKV, and for me it's become a bit of a habit. Right click, SendTo MKVMergeGUI, check the streams and labels etc, mux to destination drive. Is there a decent MP4 muxing GUI that'll open files via the Explorer right click SendTo menu? And have a decent job queue?

For a long time some software players had issues with respecting audio delays in MP4s. Chances are MPC-BE still does. MPC-HC seems fine since the switch to LAV filters. Not the fault of the MP4 format as such, but it still put MP4 in the no-go category for me. That was an issue for quite a while. Even MediaInfo wasn't always reporting MP4 audio delays correctly. I don't know if that's still the case.
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/345598-MP4-file-out-of-sync-in-VLC-not-in-MPC-HC?p=2157416&viewfull=1#post2157416

I convert audio to AAC quite a bit. AAC (like all lossy encoders) adds "padding" to the beginning and end of the audio. It can be a reasonably substantial amount. NeroAAC adds about 50ms of silence to the beginning for VBR encoding. If gapless playback info is written to the MP4/M4a container when the audio is encoded (as a separate file), which it typically is, MKVMergeGUI will use it to compensate for the padding. It removes as close to the exact amount as it can, then adjusts the audio delay by a few ms to make up for any difference. As far as I know, it's the only muxer that compensates for AAC audio padding. You can of course compensate manually, but it's easier not to need to. As far as I know it doesn't compensate for the padding created by other lossy encoders, although some (such as Aften AC3 and QAAC, from memory), have an option not to add padding. Whether encoder GUIs tend to compensate for AAC padding when outputting MP4, I have no idea, although I suspect not.

[glenpinn]

I'd argue that MKV support is pretty close to being as standard as MP4 support. Unless you use certain Apple devices.

Pretty close is definately not close enough for most people, and you definately lose the argument with your comments about Apple devices, when many people now days are using Apple.

Sorry but the MKV container is still nowhere near as standard or supported as MP4, and just reading the replies in this thread alone should tell you this.

Like i said before, if MKV was as standard as MP4, and was just as, or more versatile, then why do all the camera manufacturers chose to use the MP4 container to record high bitrate video in their new cameras.

Again, this argument about MKV defies logic, but those who wish to output to MKV then that is your choice, probably only doing it for personal use, and thats fine, but when you are doing video for other people who pay you to do it, then MP4 is the only container that i will offer to these people, and other videographers that i know also offer their videos in MP4 as well, be it 1080p or 4k video.

I have never been asked for MKV myself, but if someone specifically wants their videos in MKV, then it is no problem for me to Smart Render from the default MP4 to the MKV container just or them, but i still wouldn't see the point in doing so.

Cheers

[poisondeathray]

I'd argue that MKV support is pretty close to being as standard as MP4 support. Unless you use certain Apple devices.

It's true MKV is supported a lot more in devices/hardware these days, but there are still quite a few that do not (at least not natively without workarounds).

If you include everything - I would say it's not even close in terms of support

MP4 is more widely supported in professional applications & scenarios (e.g. NLE's , compositing & FX type applications etc..). MKV has about zero support (ok maybe a couple like lightworks and blender, which can use ffmpeg libraries) . Very few video cameras (pro/prosumer and consumer) or recording devices record natively to MKV, but many record to MP4




But it's all about pros/cons. Some potential issues and deficiencies with MP4 . For example , it's difficult to get high quality audio as uncompressed or lossless in MP4 (ALAC is supposedly supported and WAV is officially supported but forget about muxing it yourself it's impossible with commonly used software) . You can't put many A/V formats into MP4, you can't put BD sup subs into MP4 etc...

[hello_hello]

Pretty close is definately not close enough for most people, and you definately lose the argument with your comments about Apple devices, when many people now days are using Apple.

It probably only applies to Apple devices where you can't install a third party player. If you can..... there's your MKV support. If you limited yourself to audio supported by portable Apple devices out of the box.... I'm pretty sure you're still limited to stereo AAC.

Sorry but the MKV container is still nowhere near as standard or supported as MP4, and just reading the replies in this thread alone should tell you this.

Anecdotes aren't exactly evidence.
Aside from Apple devices, could someone show me an example of a currently manufactured/sold hardware player that supports MP4 out of the box, but not MKV, and can't have a third party player installed that does? There might be some portable devices with the ability to play video and only support MP4.... budget cell phones etc.... although chances are you'd be encoding specifically for those devices anyway.

Like i said before, if MKV was as standard as MP4, and was just as, or more versatile, then why do all the camera manufacturers chose to use the MP4 container to record high bitrate video in their new cameras.

Did you miss my previous post about editing and indexing?

Again, this argument about MKV defies logic, but those who wish to output to MKV then that is your choice, probably only doing it for personal use, and thats fine, but when you are doing video for other people who pay you to do it, then MP4 is the only container that i will offer to these people, and other videographers that i know also offer their videos in MP4 as well, be it 1080p or 4k video.

I've never stated MKV support has always been as good as MP4 support, only that presently they're pretty much equally supported. It wasn't so long ago if you wanted to give someone a video as a standalone file you'd probably choose AVI over MP4 to increase the likelihood their hardware player could play it, or better still create a DVD video disc, but that doesn't have much to do with MP4 support today.
It makes sense to offer a format that was more widely supported in the past, because it increases the chances of playing the file with an older player, or by someone who doesn't know how to install third party software, but it doesn't prove anything about MKV vs MP4 support today.

I have never been asked for MKV myself, but if someone specifically wants their videos in MKV, then it is no problem for me to Smart Render from the default MP4 to the MKV container just or them, but i still wouldn't see the point in doing so.

Chances are anyone specifically asking for an MKV wouldn't need to because they'd know how to remux an MP4 themselves, so they wouldn't care. What's Smart Render? Is that a program's terminology for remuxing or direct stream copy etc?

[theewizard]

AFAIK
smart render.. refers to only ecoding the frames between I frames when making a cut and editing

example you cut 5 frames off the front of a Video , smart render renders/encodes only the remaining frames up to next Iframe
the rest of the video stream is copied, not trans coded when muxing the stream into the new edited video

this is only when editing, not when changing codecs such as authoring a DVD

smart rendering minimizes quality loss when editing

[ron spencer]

come on guys....mkv's problems ended 5 yrs ago...everything plays them.

Apple TV? PS3? PS4? Xbox? Xbox360? Even Windows didn't support MKV natively until Win10.

Xbox with XBMC has been playing them since first XBOX. If they dont play then you have a crippled device. move on.

[ron spencer]

I'd argue that MKV support is pretty close to being as standard as MP4 support. Unless you use certain Apple devices.

Pretty close is definately not close enough for most people, and you definately lose the argument with your comments about Apple devices, when many people now days are using Apple.

Sorry but the MKV container is still nowhere near as standard or supported as MP4, and just reading the replies in this thread alone should tell you this.

Like i said before, if MKV was as standard as MP4, and was just as, or more versatile, then why do all the camera manufacturers chose to use the MP4 container to record high bitrate video in their new cameras.

Again, this argument about MKV defies logic, but those who wish to output to MKV then that is your choice, probably only doing it for personal use, and thats fine, but when you are doing video for other people who pay you to do it, then MP4 is the only container that i will offer to these people, and other videographers that i know also offer their videos in MP4 as well, be it 1080p or 4k video.

I have never been asked for MKV myself, but if someone specifically wants their videos in MKV, then it is no problem for me to Smart Render from the default MP4 to the MKV container just or them, but i still wouldn't see the point in doing so.

Cheers

Most camcorders use mts streams with AC3....not mp4. If you choose mp4 as an OPTION, be sure you don't mess up with AAC.

Really, put it in whatever you want, just google to find out how to transfer between both...it is easy as putting lube on a ......

[glenpinn]

Chances are anyone specifically asking for an MKV wouldn't need to because they'd know how to remux an MP4 themselves, so they wouldn't care.

LOL, i think you need to take a big step back here for a moment and re-think what you have just said.

You need to understand that there are some people like you and I who know a bit about video editing etc, but what about all the millions of every day people (like all my family members and friends) who know absolutely nothing about video editing or rendering, these people are complete novices, most of them would never know a video editing tool from a spade, let alone know what MP4 and MKV is, and most of these people rely entirely on people like me who provide them with their videos to output them in a format that they are able to watch on their TV's, and i am sorry, but like it or not, MP4 is the most versatile and more preferred container out there for both professional and personal use, and more so for playback support, so that is why We use it.

Most camcorders use mts streams with AC3....not mp4. If you choose mp4 as an OPTION, be sure you don't mess up with AAC.

Really, well the fact is that AVCHD may still be used in many video cameras, even new models, but what about all these newer 4k Cameras out there in the market place that have 2 or even 3 shooting modes, the old and still very nice 1080 AVCHD (MTS) @ 28Mbps, and the higher bitrate 4k XAVC-S at between 50 and 150Mbps, packed into the MP4 container, some are also offering the video in MOV as well as MP4, unfortunately, no MKV

Been around for more than a year now, and the 4k XAVC-S (MP4) recording is very quickly becoming mainstream in a lot of 4k video cameras now, and interestingly, as we have already mentioned before, not one camera on the market saves to MKV, and the fact that MP4 is the preferred container in both the consumer and professional market place as well, and all this combined simply makes any further debate on this matter pointless.

Oh, and lets not forget about Youtube and Vimeo as 2 other examples, and i dare say they have no intention of offering MKV support any time into the future.

I have nothing personal against MKV, now days it works, maybe not on everything, but it works, so all i am going to add is that if some of you guys are so passionate about MKV then please continue to use it for your own personal use, for me it is not a valid container for me to be using professionally, and nor would i ever use on a personal level either.

Hopefully this will be my new camera of choice, shoots 1080/50p AVCHD @ 28Mbps, 1080/50p ALL-Intra @ 200Mbps, and 4k/50p XAVC-S @ 150Mbps in MP4 or MOV, really going to be a very nice camera, especially with the new larger 4/3" sensor (same as in the GH4)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1142844-REG/panasonic_ag_dvx200_4k_integrated_lens.html

Really, put it in whatever you want, just google to find out how to transfer between both...it is easy as putting lube on a ......

I am not sure what you are referring to in this quote, maybe you might like to let me know.

Cheers

Edit: regarding Smart Rendering, i think another poster has already answered that question pretty well, suffice to say that not all editing tools are able to offer this option, especially many of the lower end or lesser known tools that is.

I am not very familiar with the higher end tools such as Premier or Vegas etc.