Two alternatives

[Amitay]

I was given two files of the same movie. Both 2160p.
The smaller one is HEVC.
The larger one is AVC.
Here are the the Mediainfo for both:
HEVC
Video
ID : 1
Format : HEVC
Format/Info : High Efficiency Video Coding
Format profile : Main 10@L6@High
HDR format : SMPTE ST 2086, HDR10 compatible
Codec ID : V_MPEGH/ISO/HEVC
Duration : 3 h 28 min
Bit rate : 17.3 Mb/s
Width : 3 840 pixels
Height : 2 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 1.85:1
Frame rate mode : Constant
Frame rate : 24.000 FPS
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0 (Type 2)
Bit depth : 10 bits
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.090
Stream size : 25.1 GiB (98%)
Language : English
Default : Yes
Forced : No
Color range : Limited
Color primaries : BT.2020
Transfer characteristics : PQ
Matrix coefficients : BT.2020 non-constant
Mastering display color primaries : Display P3
Mastering display luminance : min: 0.0001 cd/m2, max: 1000 cd/m2
Maximum Content Light Level : 1014 cd/m2
Maximum Frame-Average Light Level : 263 cd/m2
AVC
Video
ID : 1
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L5.1
Format settings : CABAC / 5 Ref Frames
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, Reference frames : 5 frames
Codec ID : V_MPEG4/ISO/AVC
Duration : 3 h 29 min
Bit rate : 46.1 Mb/s
Width : 3 840 pixels
Height : 2 076 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 1.85:1
Frame rate mode : Constant
Frame rate : 24.000 FPS
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.241
Stream size : 67.5 GiB (97%)
Writing library : x264 core 157 r2969 d4099dd
Encoding settings : cabac=1 / ref=5 / deblock=1:-3:-3 / analyse=0x3:0x133 / me=umh / subme=10 / psy=1 / psy_rd=1.00:0.15 / mixed_ref=1 / me_range=48 / chroma_me=1 / trellis=2 / 8x8dct=1 / cqm=0 / deadzone=21,11 / fast_pskip=0 / chroma_qp_offset=-3 / threads=24 / lookahead_threads=4 / sliced_threads=0 / nr=0 / decimate=0 / interlaced=0 / bluray_compat=0 / constrained_intra=0 / bframes=8 / b_pyramid=2 / b_adapt=2 / b_bias=0 / direct=3 / weightb=1 / open_gop=0 / weightp=2 / keyint=250 / keyint_min=24 / scenecut=40 / intra_refresh=0 / rc=crf / mbtree=0 / crf=20.0 / qcomp=0.60 / qpmin=0 / qpmax=69 / qpstep=4 / ip_ratio=1.30 / pb_ratio=1.20 / aq=3:0.80
Language : English
Default : Yes
Forced : No
I intend to play the movie on LG OLED 65".
I admit I'm not familiar with most of the technical data above.
Could someone advise me which of those two alternatives might give me a better picture? (whatever "better" means...)
Thank you

[aedipuss]

"given two files of the same movie"

you don't own it. that's piracy. don't ask for help. sorry.


p.s. watch whichever one you prefer.

[lingyi]

But, but...it's, it's home movies of my nieces and nephews on family vacation...ummm...yeah, home movies!

J/K...100% pegleg and eye patch stuff!

[davexnet]

The first is HDR while the second appears not to be.
That could be an issue; I don't think HDR has all it's kinks worked out due to lack of standards.

My TV has basic HDR10; sometimes it burns your eyes out - like looking at the sun.
The literature talks about "speculative highlights" and "deep shadows" but reality is
miles away from this

[jagabo]

The AVC video probably has a little more detail detail. The first video is HDR and should have more dynamic range if you're set up to play HDR properly. It's up to you which looks better.

[Amitay]

But, but...it's, it's home movies of my nieces and nephews on family vacation...ummm...yeah, home movies!

J/K...100% pegleg and eye patch stuff!

Thanks. That's exactly the case. How did you guess?

[Amitay]

Thank you all.
I'm still waiting for more answers based, if possible, on the Mediainfo data I quoted.

[butterw]

It's against forum rules to discuss pirated material. Ask where you got it from.

[Amitay]

It's against forum rules to discuss pirated material. Ask where you got it from.

Why do you think it's pirated?
1. Read my reply to lingyi
2. Even if they were commercial movies, (which, of course, they're not), they might be older than the maximum period of copyright protection.

[jagabo]

I'm still waiting for more answers based, if possible, on the Mediainfo data I quoted.

There is no answer to your question. The numbers that MediaInfo reports are just properties of the video. They are not direct indicators of quality. The only way to say for sure which video looks better is to view them.

[Amitay]

I'm still waiting for more answers based, if possible, on the Mediainfo data I quoted.

There is no answer to your question. The numbers that MediaInfo reports are just properties of the video. They are not direct indicators of quality. The only way to say for sure which video looks better is to view them.

Isn't there any relationship between bit rate and bytes per pixel and quality? (at least when the figures are far apart)

[jagabo]

Isn't there any relationship between bit rate and bytes per pixel and quality? (at least when the figures are far apart)

Yes, lower bitrates deliver lower quality. But it varies between codecs (even in the same family), the setting used, any filtering that was performed before encoding, the properties of the source video(s), etc.

[Amitay]

Isn't there any relationship between bit rate and bytes per pixel and quality? (at least when the figures are far apart)

Yes, lower bitrates deliver lower quality. But it varies between codecs (even in the same family), the setting used, any filtering that was performed before encoding, the properties of the source video(s), etc.

Sounds reasonable.
Could you comment on bits per pixel?

[jagabo]

Bits per pixel is a poor proxy of video quality.

[Amitay]

Bits per pixel is a poor proxy of video quality.

Thanks, jagabo.
I thought it was somehow connected to color fidelity or sharpness.
But I admit my ignorance in those matters.

[jagabo]

Bits per pixel is a poor proxy of video quality.

Thanks, jagabo.
I thought it was somehow connected to color fidelity or sharpness.
But I admit my ignorance in those matters.

It's a measure of how much the video has been compressed. Not how well it's been compressed.