4k what to choose?

[Uffen90]

Hi guys.
I have a question, and I hope that this is the place to ask it. Otherwise, would you be helpfull and point me to the right sub then.

My question.
I have 3 files of the same movie.

File 1; 2160 Bluray x265, 10bit, sdr, bitrate 23,9 mb/s, HEVC coding. 30 gb file size.

File 2; 2160 Bluray x265, 8bit, sdr, bitrate 29,2 mb/s, AVC coding. 35 gb file size.

File 3; 2160 Bluray x265, 10bit, hdr, bitrate 13,5 mb/s, HEVC coding. 17 gb file size.

My question is, what file do I choose? Which would be the best here, which file would have the best picture? what do I look for, so in the future, I can recognize the best videofile?
I have a samsung UE55KS8005.

[teodz1984]

Not sure if Smart TVS like have 10 bit support.. PCs and more powerful mobile devices would be able to play those

Compatiblity wise: probably choose 2

Only way is to compare them visually. people perceive quality differently... so your numbers are meaningless.

If this argument is to compare material downloaded from the internet... these numbers won't matter if the original source is unknown..
Anyone can reencode a lossy mp4 and recreate those humungous FAKE files..but if the source is suspect quality will be as good as its source.. e.g. get a Screener or cam rip and pretend it is a bluray rip.

Compare this to a real lossless source like a an uncompressed bluray that you own .. if the rip and compression were done correctly then you'd expect good results.. and even smaller size for the same bitrate if you compare x265 wiith x264.


Read more here http://wp.xin.at/archives/3465/comment-page-1
also google 'X265 vs x264'
ex. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fawcboio6g4
'10 bit video vs 8 bit video'
ex. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bKjSox0uwnk

READ UP or WATCH up

[_Al_]

I'd say all support 10bit now, all of those cheap Android media players support 10bit, with those chipsets in them, coming from Asia. It would be more that weird if TV's would not play that, if supporting HEVC. It is a bit different as oppose history of H.264.

[teodz1984]

Read more here http://wp.xin.at/archives/3465/comment-page-1
also google 'X265 vs x264'
ex. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fawcboio6g4
'10 bit video vs 8 bit video'
ex. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bKjSox0uwnk

READ UP or WATCH up

[Uffen90]

Only way to find out is for the OP to try out what work and what doesn't on his hardware...

Maybe I should have been clearer as to what I meant.
It is not really what is compatible with my setup, it's more what file would give the best quality? ie the best picture?

[teodz1984]

Your logic is based on comparing files based on alleged descriptions, with no regards for the original source, how the 3 files were produced ...
It's like comparing 3 cars on a classified ad..

[Uffen90]

Only wayvis to compare them visually. people perceive quality differently... so your numbers are meaningless.

Okay, again, I asked about this because my understanding of this is not that big, so I'm trying to learn.

Could you explain to me the difference between HEVC and AVC?
I haven't really found out the difference between them?

[Cornucopia]

#3 is bogus: Hdr would never take up LESS that the same title in Sdr, probably double. Only way this is legit is if this is a supplemental, ENHANCEMENT portion to its accompanying Sdr file.
#2 is suspect, because it says in the same phrase "x265" and "AVC". Either that's a typo or lying or stupidly-worded re-encode, as x265 is HEVC, and AVC would use something like x264.
By process of elimination and going by bitrate/efficiency/quality trends, I would expect - given that ALL other factors were equal and these are from the same source/provenance and of the same generation - that #1 should be best. But don't quote me on that because I am quite dubious of all the choices and this approach in general. Why no naming of the title and chain of work to compare notes? Hate to say it but this smacks of warez/pirating.

Hevc and Avc are both in the MPEG family but Hevc is newer generation with greater features, complexity & efficiency. But even a cursory search on the terms would reveal that.

Scott

[teodz1984]

Your logic is based on comparing files based on alleged descriptions, with no regards for the original source, how the 3 files were produced ...
It's like comparing 3 cars on a classified ad..



Only way is to compare them visually. people perceive quality differently... so your numbers are meaningless.

If this argument is to compare material downloaded from the internet... these numbers won't matter if the original source is unknown..
Anyone can reencode a lossy mp4 and recreate those humungous FAKE files..but if the source is suspect quality will be as good as its source.. e.g. get a Screener or cam rip and pretend it is a bluray rip.

Compare this to a real lossless source like a an uncompressed bluray that you own .. if the rip and compression were done correctly then you'd expect good results.. and even smaller size for the same bitrate if you compare x265 wiith x264.


Some definitions:
Ultra HD Blu-ray is a digital optical disc data storage format that supersedes Blu-ray. Ultra HD Blu-ray discs are incompatible with existing Blu-ray players. Ultra HD Blu-ray supports 4K UHD (3840 × 2160 resolution) video at frame rates up to 60 frames per second, encoded using High Efficiency Video Coding. The discs support both high dynamic range by increasing the color depth to 10-bit per color and a greater color gamut than supported by conventional Blu-ray video by using the Rec. 2020 color space.

Read
for bit color https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_depth#Deep_color_.2830.2F36.2F48-bit.29
for HEVC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HEVC
for AVC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC
for video compression: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_compression#Video

[teodz1984]

Bottom line.. . No way to compare pirated stuff on the net with such numbers and expect quality out of them...

[Uffen90]

#3 is bogus: Hdr would never take up LESS that the same title in Sdr, probably double. Only way this is legit is if this is a supplemental, ENHANCEMENT portion to its accompanying Sdr file.
#2 is suspect, because it says in the same phrase "x265" and "AVC". Either that's a typo or lying or stupidly-worded re-encode, as x265 is HEVC, and AVC would use something like x264.
By process of elimination and going by bitrate/efficiency/quality trends, I would expect - given that ALL other factors were equal and these are from the same source/provenance and of the same generation - that #1 should be best. But don't quote me on that because I am quite dubious of all the choices and this approach in general. Why no naming of the title and chain of work to compare notes? Hate to say it but this smacks of warez/pirating.

Hevc and Avc are both in the MPEG family but Hevc is newer generation with greater features, complexity & efficiency. But even a cursory search on the terms would reveal that.

Scott

Just hypothetical. I would choose #1. Then I would go for HEVC SDR 10bit, contra to HEVC SDR 8bit? That would yield the best quality in picture?

[Uffen90]

Your logic is based on comparing files based on alleged descriptions, with no regards for the original source, how the 3 files were produced ...
It's like comparing 3 cars on a classified ad..



Only way is to compare them visually. people perceive quality differently... so your numbers are meaningless.

If this argument is to compare material downloaded from the internet... these numbers won't matter if the original source is unknown..
Anyone can reencode a lossy mp4 and recreate those humungous FAKE files..but if the source is suspect quality will be as good as its source.. e.g. get a Screener or cam rip and pretend it is a bluray rip.

Compare this to a real lossless source like a an uncompressed bluray that you own .. if the rip and compression were done correctly then you'd expect good results.. and even smaller size for the same bitrate if you compare x265 wiith x264.


Some definitions:
Ultra HD Blu-ray is a digital optical disc data storage format that supersedes Blu-ray. Ultra HD Blu-ray discs are incompatible with existing Blu-ray players. Ultra HD Blu-ray supports 4K UHD (3840 × 2160 resolution) video at frame rates up to 60 frames per second, encoded using High Efficiency Video Coding. The discs support both high dynamic range by increasing the color depth to 10-bit per color and a greater color gamut than supported by conventional Blu-ray video by using the Rec. 2020 color space.

Read
for bit color https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_depth#Deep_color_.2830.2F36.2F48-bit.29
for HEVC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HEVC
for AVC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC
for video compression: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_compression#Video

So in theory, if I understand correct that is, HEVC is the best compression to go with? since it can compress the files better, and with a better quality in picture?
No, we don't know the original source, I'll give you that, and that could be problematic, since people would be able to just "blow" up a bad rip, and call it 4k?

It is worth mentioning that all the files info say, 3840x1600.

Encoding settings : cpuid=1173503 / frame-threads=16 / numa-pools=24,24,24,24 / wpp / no-pmode / no-pme / no-psnr / no-ssim / log-level=2 / input-csp=1 / input-res=3840x1600 / interlace=0 / total-frames=0 / level-idc=51 / high-tier=1 / uhd-bd=0 / ref=3 / no-allow-non-conformance / repeat-headers / annexb / aud / hrd / info / hash=0 / no-temporal-layers / no-open-gop / min-keyint=1 / keyint=24 / bframes=4 / b-adapt=2 / b-pyramid / bframe-bias=0 / rc-lookahead=25 / lookahead-slices=4 / scenecut=40 / no-intra-refresh / ctu=64 / min-cu-size=8 / no-rect / no-amp / max-tu-size=32 / tu-inter-depth=1 / tu-intra-depth=1 / limit-tu=0 / rdoq-level=0 / dynamic-rd=0.00 / no-ssim-rd / signhide / no-tskip / nr-intra=0 / nr-inter=0 / no-constrained-intra / strong-intra-smoothing / max-merge=2 / limit-refs=3 / no-limit-modes / me=1 / subme=2 / merange=57 / temporal-mvp / weightp / no-weightb / no-analyze-src-pics / deblock=0:0 / no-sao / no-sao-non-deblock / rd=3 / no-early-skip / rskip / no-fast-intra / no-tskip-fast / no-cu-lossless / no-b-intra / rdpenalty=0 / psy-rd=2.00 / psy-rdoq=0.00 / no-rd-refine / analysis-reuse-mode=0 / no-lossless / cbqpoffs=0 / crqpoffs=0 / rc=crf / crf=16.0 / qcomp=0.60 / qpstep=4 / stats-write=0 / stats-read=0 / vbv-maxrate=160000 / vbv-bufsize=160000 / vbv-init=0.9 / crf-max=0.0 / crf-min=0.0 / ipratio=1.40 / pbratio=1.30 / aq-mode=1 / aq-strength=1.00 / cutree / zone-count=0 / no-strict-cbr / qg-size=32 / no-rc-grain / qpmax=69 / qpmin=0 / no-const-vbv / sar=1 / overscan=0 / videoformat=5 / range=0 / colorprim=2 / transfer=2 / colormatrix=2 / chromaloc=0 / display-window=0 / max-cll=0,0 / min-luma=0 / max-luma=1023 / log2-max-poc-lsb=8 / vui-timing-info / vui-hrd-info / slices=1 / opt-qp-pps / opt-ref-list-length-pps / no-multi-pass-opt-rps / scenecut-bias=0.05 / no-opt-cu-delta-qp / no-aq-motion / no-hdr / no-hdr-opt / no-dhdr10-opt / analysis-reuse-level=5 / scale-factor=0 / refine-intra=0 / refine-inter=0 / refine-mv=0 / no-limit-sao / ctu-info=0

I don't know if this info yields any kind of information?
I do not attend to have you tell me what kind of file I should download, but I'm curious in this field, and would like to learn more, since I would like to be able to rip my own collection one day, so I would be able to put it on a nas, instead of having a lot of bluray discs take up a lot of space.
I thought this might be the way to go, to learn a little more, before I jump into it.

[teodz1984]

But note: HEVC might be more taxing than AVC when encoding (unless you invest in the proper GPUS and your CPUs are powerful enough)..
So the encode may take longer (especiallly if you do 10bit color). - 2x to 16x depending on your current hardware.. and encoding scripts

You may have to change the bitrate to accommodate movies with lots of action scenes .. i.e. over compression leads to artifacting (glitching).
There is no PERFECT RULE FOR ENCODING. You may have to visit other parts of the forum to get the optimized setups for encoding.
Also, As I said in the past HEVC will not work with old devices.. so you must find a sweet spot on what codec that works for you..

[Uffen90]

But note: HEVC might be more taxing than AVC when encoding (unless you invest in the proper GPUS and your CPUs are powerful enough)..
So the encode may take longer (especiallly if you do 10bit color). - 2x to 16x depending on your current hardware.. and encoding scripts

You may have to change the bitrate to accommodate movies with lots of action scenes .. i.e. over compression leads to artifacting (glitching).
There is no PERFECT RULE FOR ENCODING. You may have to visit other parts of the forum to get the optimized setups for encoding.
Also, As I said in the past HEVC will not work with old devices.. so you must find a sweet spot on what codec that works for you..

Thanks for all of your help. This is a very good starting point.

I need to upgrade my computer then. As to playable devices. I mentioned my tv, that is rather new, not even 1 year. And I have Apple TV 4k, so I such be able to watch this.
But again, this is much appreciated.
Always find great help in this forum.

[teodz1984]

You may want to look into this since it concerns your TV

http://www.minixforum.com/threads/high-bitrate-4k-movie-lagging-on-kodi-17-1.16070/