VideoHelp Forum


Try StreamFab All-in-One and rip Netflix video! Or Try DVDFab and copy Blu-rays! or rip iTunes movies!
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8
Thread
  1. I am using CRF 16 which is fairly good. For some reason, the CRF 16 encode is getting banding or making it worse, while 2-pass looks better.
    The settings are the same, except in 2-pass settings, I'm specifying a bitrate, while with CRF, it's choosing it.



    The computer monitor in the comparison screenshots is where it's most obvious.

    Source vs CRF 16
    https://slow.pics/c/ktcMLHyV

    Source vs 2-Pass
    https://slow.pics/c/9NeeY42u

    CRF16 vs 2-Pass
    https://slow.pics/c/dNmJKjuS


    As you can see, the banding in CRF looks pretty obvious. The 2-pass looks like its getting some too, but its to a much lesser extent and you have to actually look for it.

    Whats up with CRF getting this banding so badly? Is CRF 16 not enough bitrate?

    I set 2-Pass to 13,738kbps, while CRF 16 seems to be giving it about 8457kbps.
    Quote Quote  
  2. Originally Posted by killerteengohan View Post

    I set 2-Pass to 13,738kbps, while CRF 16 seems to be giving it about 8457kbps.
    Compare at the same bitrate and you should get similar results

    To put it another way, you're comparing a ~1.6x more bitrate version
    Quote Quote  
  3. So the problem is its not enough bitrate at CRF 16?

    But they say CRF 17 should be nearly the same as the source. Thats CRF 16 which is even better, and that is clearly not almost the same as the source.

    I've always used 2-pass so I am not an expert on CRF encodes. I just wanted to try CRF to lessen the encoding time.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Yes, the problem is not enough bitrate

    When you lower psy-rd, or increase deblock, the bitrate at a given CRF value will be lower

    If you like the 2pass results, you would have to use a lower CRF with those settings. It's impossible to "guess" what the correct CRF value should be.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Originally Posted by killerteengohan View Post
    So the problem is its not enough bitrate at CRF 16?
    Yes.

    Originally Posted by killerteengohan View Post
    But they say CRF 17 should be nearly the same as the source.
    For most people, at normal viewing speed/distance, for most material yes. But there are specific cases where it's not -- like shallow gradients. I think you need to get down to about 10 or 12 to cover edge cases like this. --tune grain might help. Or --aq-strength=1.5 or more. But in the end, they end up using more bitrate.
    Quote Quote  
  6. 10bit encoding helps too
    Quote Quote  
  7. Yes 10 bit encoding can help. How much can depend on your playback device. Some 8 bit devices decompress to 10 bit YUV then convert to 8 bit RGB. Others decompress to 10 bit YUV, convert to 8 bit YUV (simple truncation, no dithering), then convert to RGB. In the former case you get smoother gradients. In the latter case it doesn't help much.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Source also has banding although less pronounced. This kind of content is perfect for x265 10bit. I mean, those x264 bitrates you use are enormous for this type of content.

    Btw, decent show The Spectacular Spider-Man
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads