Want to learn to h266 compress. staxrip feels intimidating . need guidance

[videohelplover]

HI
I have many video on my SSD that I want to compress to save space on the computer. I am open to free version and I am more inclined toward op open source but flexible as long as it's a freeware.

my PC is sort of basic like this
HP EliteDesk 800 G1 (Core i5-4590, 16 GB RAM, Windows 10),

-is Staxrip to be used or other software?
-Is my hardware compatible or too old?

-which version to install how ?

thanks

[Alwyn]

Buy a bigger HDD.

[pandy]

use libvvenc (fmpeg vvc encoder) .

[lollo]

Buy a bigger HDD.

[ProWo]

Don't use H.266; use H.264 instead, for compatibility reasons.
H.266 can only be played back on very few devices.

[videohelplover]

Don't use H.266; use H.264 instead, for compatibility reasons.
H.266 can only be played back on very few devices.

HI I am aware aware that there will be some compatibility issue with Facebook or WhatsApp but those videos on my HDD I talk about are videos for myself to consult later.

From what I already somewhere online H266 are a third of the size of 264. So that's very interesting. I would like to find a way to use this and gradually transform all my videos to H266 for the category of video I don't anticipate to put on social media apart from having a special reader and not being able to publish on Facebook and WhatsApp and probably Instagram. Is there other compatibility reasons that you see for me not to use it? Thank you, have a nice day.
H.264 1,000 MB
H.265 734 MB
AV1 569 MB
H.266 368 MB

[videohelplover]

Buy a bigger HDD.

Hi, for the moment I want to learn how to shrink what I can shrink instead of buoying yet another object.it makes sense for me to shrink the video I don't use a lot or won't publish then later on maybe I will look for more space if needed.

Also, there is no gain in efficiency to buy a new drive since I have Samsung Evo 860 and the PC I Use do not have M2 slots so I will not feel any improvement by getting another drive which kind of also tells me that it's not the right time.

I also find it strange that three years ago I bought Seagate external 4Tera for 169 if my memory is correct and it has only risen in price since then. Strange

[videohelplover]

use libvvenc (fmpeg vvc encoder) .

HI
1are there video tutorial that explain how to install and use?

Would there be code to type for every video i want to compress or is there a path with mouse click , browse folder select destination etc?

2Can we ask it to compress multiple videos during one night?

3 do installing it risk of bringin instability to the pc?

thanks

[pandy]

use libvvenc (fmpeg vvc encoder) .

HI
1are there video tutorial that explain how to install and use?

Would there be code to type for every video i want to compress or is there a path with mouse click , browse folder select destination etc?

2Can we ask it to compress multiple videos during one night?

3 do installing it risk of bringin instability to the pc?

thanks

You can use general guidelines from https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/WikiStart - there is Encoding section and H.264 and H.265 use similar workload pattern - use bellow libvvenc ffmpeg options as reference:

libvvenc AVOptions:
  -preset            <int>        E..V....... set encoding preset (from 0 to 4) (default medium)
     faster          0            E..V....... 0
     fast            1            E..V....... 1
     medium          2            E..V....... 2
     slow            3            E..V....... 3
     slower          4            E..V....... 4
  -qp                <int>        E..V....... set quantization (from -1 to 63) (default 32)
  -qpa               <boolean>    E..V....... set subjective (perceptually motivated) optimization (default true)
  -passlogfile       <string>     E..V....... Filename for 2 pass stats
  -stats             <string>     E..V....... Filename for 2 pass stats
  -period            <int>        E..V....... set (intra) refresh period in seconds (from 1 to INT_MAX) (default 1)
  -vvenc-params      <dictionary> E..V....... set the vvenc configuration using a :-separated list of key=value parameters
  -level             <string>     E..V....... Specify level (as defined by Annex A)
  -tier              <int>        E..V....... set vvc tier (from 0 to 1) (default main)
     main            0            E..V....... main
     high            1            E..V....... high

I usually use ffmpeg with simple batch to automate conversions so it work more or less as 'run and forget' however from your perspective this still may be considered as unfriendly way - you can use one of few GUI's for ffmpeg - author one of them ( ProWo ) already expressed his opinion in your thread - have no knowledge if his software support libvvenc.

As libvvenc is multithreaded and very modern codec then for sure he will use all CPU power you can provide - not sure if during one night you will be able to compress even single video as VVC require enormous CPU computational power - i estimate it as 16..32 times more demanding than H.265 which itself is like 8..16 times more complex to encode when compared to H.264.

ffmpeg itself not require any installation - this is single binary file and you may consider it as kind of portable app - you can find recent ffmpeg builds provided by autodidact here https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/414767-ffmpeg-7-0-1-and-Windows-7 - they will work fine under Win10 .

ProWo ffmpeg gui is supported by this thread https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/396490-clever-FFmpeg-GUI-small-FFmpeg-UI-fully-por...o-installation .

One remark from my side - take figures about VVC compression efficiency with some reserve - those figures are average and sometimes idealized - usually for UHD and higher resolutions - for older video resolution standards like SD and HD expect lower compression gain, side to this VVC is highly immature video codec - this means compatibility is low, high computational time and lower quality.
You need lot of patience - good luck

[Sharc]

use libvvenc (fmpeg vvc encoder) .

are there video tutorial that explain how to install and use?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzICcORdjeU

[pandy]

You can create batch with settings proposed by Sharc but enhanced with some little automation so you will be able simply drag & drop your video on icon representing batch thus no need to change input file name.

@setlocal

@set filename=%1

@ffmpeg.exe -y -i %filename% -c:v libvvenc -preset:v fast -period 10 -qp 21 -c:a copy "%~n1_vvc.mp4"

@endlocal

There is many possibilities to enhance this batch further - this is how we have fun here...

[fred_abila]

StaxRip is a reasonable choice. It's free, it includes the VVenC encoder for H.266, and it's portable: download the latest x64 release from its GitHub releases page, unzip it, and run StaxRip.exe. Then choose VVenC from the encoder list (bottom right). Before you convert the whole SSD, though, test one short clip, because two things may change your mind.

1. Speed. VVenC is very slow, and an i5-4590 has 4 cores with no hyperthreading. Even on the faster presets, expect one hour of 1080p to take many hours of encoding. On medium or slow it can run for days. Time a 2-minute clip and multiply by your library size.
2. Playback. H.266 decoding is still patchy. Recent ffmpeg (7.1 and newer) and players built on it can decode it, but plenty of players, TVs and phones can't yet. For personal archives that you might want to open in ten years, that's a real risk.

If you want to try it without StaxRip's menus, an ffmpeg build that includes libvvenc (the gyan.dev "full" Windows builds do) works from the command line:
ffmpeg -i input.mp4 -c:v libvvenc -preset fast -qp 32 -c:a copy output.mp4
A higher -qp makes the file smaller and lowers quality.

What I'd actually suggest comparing first: AV1 with SVT-AV1, which is built into HandBrake (free, and much less intimidating than StaxRip). It gets a good share of H.266's savings over H.264, encodes far faster on your CPU, and plays almost everywhere now. Encode the same test clip both ways at similar quality and compare the sizes and times. Whichever you pick, keep the originals until you've checked that the encodes play properly.

[videohelplover]

use libvvenc (fmpeg vvc encoder) .

HI
1are there video tutorial that explain how to install and use?

Would there be code to type for every video i want to compress or is there a path with mouse click , browse folder select destination etc?

2Can we ask it to compress multiple videos during one night?

3 do installing it risk of bringin instability to the pc?

thanks

You can use general guidelines from https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/WikiStart - there is Encoding section and H.264 and H.265 use similar workload pattern - use bellow libvvenc ffmpeg options as reference:

libvvenc AVOptions:
  -preset            <int>        E..V....... set encoding preset (from 0 to 4) (default medium)
     faster          0            E..V....... 0
     fast            1            E..V....... 1
     medium          2            E..V....... 2
     slow            3            E..V....... 3
     slower          4            E..V....... 4
  -qp                <int>        E..V....... set quantization (from -1 to 63) (default 32)
  -qpa               <boolean>    E..V....... set subjective (perceptually motivated) optimization (default true)
  -passlogfile       <string>     E..V....... Filename for 2 pass stats
  -stats             <string>     E..V....... Filename for 2 pass stats
  -period            <int>        E..V....... set (intra) refresh period in seconds (from 1 to INT_MAX) (default 1)
  -vvenc-params      <dictionary> E..V....... set the vvenc configuration using a :-separated list of key=value parameters
  -level             <string>     E..V....... Specify level (as defined by Annex A)
  -tier              <int>        E..V....... set vvc tier (from 0 to 1) (default main)
     main            0            E..V....... main
     high            1            E..V....... high

I usually use ffmpeg with simple batch to automate conversions so it work more or less as 'run and forget' however from your perspective this still may be considered as unfriendly way - you can use one of few GUI's for ffmpeg - author one of them ( ProWo ) already expressed his opinion in your thread - have no knowledge if his software support libvvenc.

As libvvenc is multithreaded and very modern codec then for sure he will use all CPU power you can provide - not sure if during one night you will be able to compress even single video as VVC require enormous CPU computational power - i estimate it as 16..32 times more demanding than H.265 which itself is like 8..16 times more complex to encode when compared to H.264.

ffmpeg itself not require any installation - this is single binary file and you may consider it as kind of portable app - you can find recent ffmpeg builds provided by autodidact here https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/414767-ffmpeg-7-0-1-and-Windows-7 - they will work fine under Win10 .

ProWo ffmpeg gui is supported by this thread https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/396490-clever-FFmpeg-GUI-small-FFmpeg-UI-fully-por...o-installation .

One remark from my side - take figures about VVC compression efficiency with some reserve - those figures are average and sometimes idealized - usually for UHD and higher resolutions - for older video resolution standards like SD and HD expect lower compression gain, side to this VVC is highly immature video codec - this means compatibility is low, high computational time and lower quality.
You need lot of patience - good luck

You write well my friend.
Ok the time to compress a video is definitively someting i need to know more about since if I can only do one hour per night it brings me in a non realistic situation problably.

[davexnet]

Just out of interest, regarding encode speed, I ran some tests myself using a 90 second SD video clip in FFmpeg 8.1:


x264 fast............8.12x
libsvtav1 preset9 4.76x
libsvtav1 preset8 3.39x
HEVC fast...........2.81x
VVC fast.............0.36x

(Absolute timings is a reflection of my old CPU, but relative timings may be useful)

[Sharc]

Ok the time to compress a video is definitively someting i need to know more about since if I can only do one hour per night it brings me in a non realistic situation problably.

Well, this was quite realistic about 20+ years ago using x264 on PC's from that period

[videohelplover]

Snd lowers quality.

What I'd actually suggest comparing first: AV1 with SVT-AV1, which is built into HandBrake (free, and much less intimidating than StaxRip). It gets a good share of H.266's savings over H.264, encodes far faster on your CPU, and plays almost everywhere now. Encode the same test clip both ways at similar quality and compare the sizes and times. Whichever you pick, keep the originals until you've checked that the encodes play properly.

HI i dont need to keep good video quality so I just set 20 fps and quatlity 37. but this image resolution and scaling does that choice influence the final size weitgh mb of the video?

what esle can i set low to save more space?

[videohelplover]

Just out of interest, regarding encode speed, I ran some tests myself using a 90 second SD video clip in FFmpeg 8.1:


x264 fast............8.12x
libsvtav1 preset9 4.76x
libsvtav1 preset8 3.39x
HEVC fast...........2.81x
VVC fast.............0.36x

(Absolute timings is a reflection of my old CPU, but relative timings may be useful)

how to read that what is x for?

[pandy]

Ok the time to compress a video is definitively someting i need to know more about since if I can only do one hour per night it brings me in a non realistic situation problably.

So that's why you get so many replies "go for bigger storage" - i've tried to address your question technically but real life is VVC is new codec, existing implementations are still immature even if they use lessons learned through projects like x264 and x265, side to this there is practically no market penetration from VVC side - overall compatibility is low.
Also as VVC (like many other high compression codecs) is lossy codec so if your goal is to archive your videos with hope that in future you will try to improve their quality or do something else than simple watching then VVC is unfortunate choice for compression - you simply loose quality.

Realistically check your ownership 0 what codec you are using currently, perhaps you can use something less complex than VVC.

[davexnet]

Just out of interest, regarding encode speed, I ran some tests myself using a 90 second SD video clip in FFmpeg 8.1:


x264 fast............8.12x
libsvtav1 preset9 4.76x
libsvtav1 preset8 3.39x
HEVC fast...........2.81x
VVC fast.............0.36x

(Absolute timings is a reflection of my old CPU, but relative timings may be useful)

how to read that what is x for?

If you divide the original 90 seconds by "x" you get the encode speed in seconds.
For example, x264, 90/8.12 = approx 11 seconds

[fred_abila]

Yes, resolution makes the biggest difference. At the same quality setting, file size roughly follows pixel count, so dropping 1080p to 720p (or 480p) can cut the size by half or more. In HandBrake it's on the Dimensions tab: set the resolution limit or width and keep the aspect ratio.

Other settings that save space:
- Frame rate: 20 fps helps a bit, but it looks choppy, and size drops less than you'd expect. Same as source is usually the better trade.
- Quality: you're on RF 37, which is already very low quality. Going higher (e.g. 40) shrinks the file further but gets blocky quickly.
- Audio: use AAC at 64 to 96 kbps, or mono for speech. Passthrough of the original audio can waste a lot of space.
- Encoder preset: a slower SVT-AV1 preset (e.g. 6 instead of 10) gives a smaller file at the same quality, but it takes longer.

Test on one short clip and compare sizes before running the whole batch.

[videohelplover]

Just out of interest, regarding encode speed, I ran some tests myself using a 90 second SD video clip in FFmpeg 8.1:


x264 fast............8.12x
libsvtav1 preset9 4.76x
libsvtav1 preset8 3.39x
HEVC fast...........2.81x
VVC fast.............0.36x

(Absolute timings is a reflection of my old CPU, but relative timings may be useful)

how to read that what is x for?

If you divide the original 90 seconds by "x" you get the encode speed in seconds.
For example, x264, 90/8.12 = approx 11 seconds

so approximateley , vvs is 22times slower than h264 correct according to your numbers?

[davexnet]

so approximateley , vvs is 22times slower than h264 correct according to your numbers?

Yes that's correct. But you should try it on your own PC

[videohelplover]

-To publish a video on social media like Facebook, WhatsApp and others Do they all accept AV1stv? AV1 MP4, AV1 Mkv? what about h265 h264 compatibility comparaison
----------
- for the other catégory of my video, The ones I want to keep for myself and not plan to publish online: Now I realize H266 Might not be realistic because of the time so I'm left with having to choose between 264 265 and aV1
Is there something I should know before converting all the video I want to keep for myself? For example, if in 10 years I want to convert again those videos that I convert today, but using h.266(in 10 years) is there a format that I should use now to make the futureh266 encoding easier? Because I will not keep the original files. I still want to do some compression today but not with 266

[fred_abila]

For anything you'll publish, make an H.264 MP4 with AAC audio. Every platform accepts it, and Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp re-encode it on upload anyway. AV1 and H.265 upload support is hit and miss, and many phones can't play them reliably, so don't rely on them for sharing.

For your private archive: no format you pick now makes a later H.266 conversion "easier". Every lossy re-encode loses quality, whatever the source codec. If you convert to AV1/H.265 today and to H.266 in ten years, the losses stack. So choose one final format and encode once.

Of your three choices, H.265 (HEVC) plays on the most devices today. AV1 gives smaller files but needs newer hardware. Since you won't keep the originals, don't go as low as RF 37. Try something like RF 28-30 in HandBrake. Test one short clip, check that it plays on every device you use, and only then convert the rest.

[Sharc]

@OP: If quality matters and if you are serious about keeping/archiving your videos for later re-encoding you should keep your files as they are today or convert them losslessly to a common (industry) archiving format like ffv1 - or perhaps nearly lossless like ProRes. Then apply a proper backup strategy to prevent loosing your archived files. Requires (lot of) storage space in any case. And if your video files are interlaced (like tape captures) I would leave them interlaced for archiving.
If you are less concerned about quality you may take your multi-compression route and start with x264 using the lowest CRF (RF in Handbrake) you can afford size-wise today. There's a very good chance that you can still open these x264 files in 10+ years from now. Just don't forget that the damage (or quality compromise/loss) you apply today with your current knowledge and tools can't be undone with future re-compression of these files.

[videohelplover]

ok thanks