I've tried 2 approaches in getting mkv file from a single source: A bdmv file sent to me of an old Japanese movie.
MakeMkv: I got a 26 gb mkv file, 1920x1080, with very high specs (media info).
DvdFab: I got a much smaller mkv file, 15 gb, 1920x820 with much lower specs.
The DvdFab produced the movie ONLY without the black horizontal frames which appear when I play it on a large 65" OLED screen.
I fully understand that the screen shows these 2 black frames because of the different ratio. (1:2.32 vs 1:1.78)
Assuming that I don't care about those black lines, I'd like to know whether there is REALLY a difference in picture quality or the mediainfo specs just reflect the difference in ratio?
Following are the mediainfo specs:
_____________________________
Video
ID : 1
ID in the original source medium : 4113 (0x1011)
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L4.1
Format settings : CABAC / 4 Ref Frames
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, RefFrames : 4 frames
Codec ID : V_MPEG4/ISO/AVC
Duration : 1 h 35 min
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 35.0 Mb/s
Maximum bit rate : 37.0 Mb/s
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate mode : Constant
Frame rate : 23.976 (24000/1001) FPS
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.703
Stream size : 23.4 GiB (96%)
Language : English
Default : No
Forced : No
Color range : Limited
Color primaries : BT.709
Transfer characteristics : BT.709
Matrix coefficients : BT.709
Original source medium : Blu-ray
______________________________________
Video
ID : 1
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L4.1
Format settings : CABAC / 2 Ref Frames
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, RefFrames : 2 frames
Codec ID : V_MPEG4/ISO/AVC
Duration : 1 h 35 min
Nominal bit rate : 18.9 Mb/s
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 820 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 2.35:1
Frame rate mode : Constant
Frame rate : 23.976 (24000/1001) FPS
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.500
Writing library : x264 core 142
Default : Yes
Forced : No
Color range : Limited
Color primaries : BT.709
Transfer characteristics : BT.709
Matrix coefficients : BT.709
Original source medium : Blu-ray
Try StreamFab Downloader and download from Netflix, Amazon, Youtube! Or Try DVDFab and copy Blu-rays! or rip iTunes movies!
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 22 of 22
Thread
-
-
Please rephrase your question as currently it may be not clear - how you define quality - this is very important!!!
-
Assuming that I don't care about those black lines, I'd like to know whether there is REALLY a difference in picture quality or the mediainfo specs just reflect the difference in ratio?
There should be a noticeable difference in quality, in favor of the bigger file of course. Black bars and aspect ratio are something else entirely and have no impact on quality or file size. -
Thank you.
Could others reaffirm this answer?
I ask because the smaller file reflects much less area than the larger one -
You can only compare quality by watching the 2 movies looking for faults in one or the other..
-
Thank you & jagabo.
This seems a more practical method than "watching & comparing" the 2 files (unless, of course, one is Superman's brother...)
Cornucopia, You seem quite decisive concerning the DvdFab's re-encoding. I'll act accordingly, unless someone else has something to add. -
-
If you use MakeMkv, then you are just extracting the original video and audio and putting it in a MKV container..No encoding .. So it is lossless
if you use any app to do a recode it will be a lossy encode because information is lost during the encoding process..
The reason why ithe recode had a smaller area is because it was resized and encoded to a certain template.. which usually tells the video dimensiosn, amount of compressions used and filters added which mighr make a difference in PIX quality. Someone usually sets the template on what his preference is SIZE WISE , QUALITY WISE or TIME TO ENCODE wise... The possibilities depend on the encoder..
-
Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
FAQs: Best Blank Discs • Best TBCs • Best VCRs for capture • Restore VHS -
Then once again my question how you will verify if outcome of your processing is "as being as close to the source as possible, assuming the source has no technical faults" ?
You may ask: Why he asking for such weird things like your quality definition? My answer is: Because your definition of quality may be different than mine.
If you are interested in same (source) quality then just copy existing elementary video stream (and associated audio + other data).
Otorhinolaryngology - get well quickly! -
Thank you all for your enlightening comments.
They were very convincing & well reasoned.
One more question:
After I get the mkv file (from makemkv), I use mkvtoolnix in order to filter out the the subtitles , queer languages audio tracks and chapters.
I certainly instruct it "no extra compression".
If I understand correctly, this only means creating a new mkv envelope, without tampering with the video & audio files inside.
Am I right? -
Yes. MakeMKV takes the video and audio streams out of the source container and puts them in an MKV container without otherwise changing them.
Whether you notice the difference between the original and a re-encoded version made with DVDFab (or any other program) depends on the settings used and how closely you look. -
Hi there, Pandy
You write: You may ask: Why he asking for such weird things like your quality definition? My answer is: Because your definition of quality may be different than mine.
If you are interested in same (source) quality then just copy existing elementary video stream (and associated audio + other data).
Despite being a mathematician, I'm quite perplexed by your answer.
Let's assume that we have a remote island on which there's some male population plus a single female.
Now we make a poll among the members of this male population:
Who is the fairest lady on the island?
Certainly she wins!!! (Although she might be a lame, one eyed moron).
If you dig me, please re-read your reply to the basic facts I've attempted to present above: Either I'm wrong in believing there's only one acceptable source, ("criterion" BluRay) or there's another woman in a remote cave, unseen by poor me, but you know her exact location ("just copy existing elementary video stream (and associated audio + other data").
That leaves us 2 alternatives:
Either you tell me where to find that elusive "elementary video stream"...
Or tell me whether you've enjoyed Nersterov's brilliant essay "On the definition of definition" which can be read in the following link:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.3103/S0147688210020061 -
Thank you for the info. It corresponds with what other sources claim.
As for noticing the difference, I've tried comparing the 2 videos after hearing the opinions of most people in this thread and I can safely claim: on a 65" LG OLED screen the difference is quite dramatic. (As suggested by Peter Sagan in this thread).
Again, you and the others here helped me a lot in having reached what I believe to be the right answer to the question I've raised.Last edited by nidany; 18th Jun 2018 at 08:15.
-
We don't need assume anything - as you are mathematician then it should be not a problem to say that concept of quality is highly subjective idea unless we use objective ways to define and measure quality. From this moment i can only express my personal opinion and hope it will be not highly criticised by others in this thread.
As we (engineers/scientist) are unable to create objective human perception (audio/video etc) model or proposed models can't be fully verified on objective way (many reasons may prevent objective verification) then we are unable to create some objective quality definition that cover highly subjective human perception and as such there is no objective way to measure subjective quality.
If you are pursuing quality identical with your source then only copy (bitexact) should be important to you so as i understand you are not interested in any video signal processing that will imply lossy decoding and after processing lossy encoding.
But if you are not interested in perfect copy of your source then area of choices began to be extremely wide but highly subjective - some people say that for them quality is OK where it is not OK for me but something that it is OK for me may have too low quality for someone else.
That's why quality is very tricky term and before discussing methods to achieve particular quality perhaps it is good to agree what quality means.
Whenever term quality is used especially high quality it is good to agree on some common things - some objective merits may be useful but can't be considered rock solid definition (for example high bitrate may suggest expected quality as high but we can't generalise and use high bitrate as synonym of high quality).
Elementary stream is embedded (encapsulated) within container - many Elementary Streams is (can be) encapsulated within container and seen as unity.
If you copying your source (bitexact copy) you copying elementary streams (all or only selected) to new container (same or different type). -
Hi Pandy,
I really can't understand why you prefer to ignore what I've written above:
"I define "quality" as being as close to the source as possible, assuming the source has no technical faults."
I know my English isn't perfect but still...
You can consider yourself fortunate for not being one of my students in the university - not because we don't agree, but due to the fact that you prefer to listen to yourself.
I really hope that it's only a problem of a language barrier...
Anyway, thank you for explaining that mkv is a "capsule" containing other files.
As a last attempt to explain my definition of quality, let us look at the following short sentences which relate to the REAL BluRay I was talking about:
1. The great Japanese director Akira Kurosawa made the masterpiece Sanjuro
2. Criterion films took the raw material and re-mastered it
3. Criterion have the resources & equipment to do it
4. Criterion do not attempt to change anything in the original movie (as far as technically possible)
5. I have the Criterion BluRay "Sanjuro"
6. I want to watch the movie on my LG screen
7. I am far from being a genius like Kurosawa
8. That is why I want to keep as close to his original movie
9. As a logical conclusion, I want my mkv to be as close to the Criterion BluRay as possible.
QED -
Why do you keep babbling, using silly big fonts and also criticizing one of our most respected members? Peter Sagan and then Cornucopia gave you all the answers you need early in this thread. If quality is what you want, then either the original Blu-Ray or a video made from it using MakeMKV are the best quality ways to view the film. Any reencoding to lossy codecs degrades the film. It's not hard to understand.
Whan you say silly things like, "I define "quality" as being as close to the source as possible, assuming the source has no technical faults.", then you open the door to Pandy's questions and statements, but how can there be any other answer except for "Watch the Blu-Ray, or the output from MakeMKV if you want to waste some time creating it"? You never mentioned final file size or any other factors other than quality being considerations. -
Well - i love Kurosawa films and English is also not my native language (it is self learned as a way to gain knowledge of electronics so it is perfectly imperfect) and i've finished my tech university decades ago...but this not changing anything from my previous statement's.
As i said before - hope it is clear - if you are pursuing closest quality to source then you are interested in bit exact copy of your source and this is where discussion ends - no lossy decoding, no lossy encoding - it is like copy files on computer (hope that copy is not difficult concept for mathematician).
Proper word to describe operation of copying elementary streams from one container to different one is called multiplexing (re-multplexing, trans-multiplexing).
And this ends our discussion.
Similar Threads
-
Improving Picture Quality
By Teac23 in forum RestorationReplies: 5Last Post: 23rd Feb 2017, 09:51 -
Uverse and picture quality
By davecc in forum DVB / IPTVReplies: 2Last Post: 9th Sep 2015, 18:54 -
dvd played in vlc produces a blocky picture
By stoneystevenson in forum DVD RippingReplies: 5Last Post: 16th Jan 2015, 10:36 -
movie picture is not the same quality
By djones201 in forum Video ConversionReplies: 2Last Post: 10th Feb 2014, 13:20 -
Canon Camcorders Picture Quality
By silegnav in forum Camcorders (DV/HDV/AVCHD/HD)Replies: 4Last Post: 20th Sep 2013, 09:22