4k remux vs encode. Rip versions are higher and Remux ones are over 60GB.

4k remux vs encode ts extension. At the very least doubling in size. a high quality encode. However, the reason I am asking this question again on this sub, is because I am specifically interested in whether the difference would be With the release of Captain Marvel, there is a good quality 4k iTunes DL available. FGT plagiarizes from other groups and adds unnecessary tracks. this is just my personal opinions. Any time you re-encode a blu-ray, (which is what a Rip is) you will get some amount of compression artifacts and light banding. Question Hello guys, I just bought my first 4K TV (LG OLED65C9) and I want to start getting some 4K movies. In this case the x265 means the person reencoded the remux, lowering the quality, in order to make it h265 and lower the size. You just have to check the file size. The size difference is one is AVC at low compression and the other is x265 at higher compression. I just keep reading that encoder groups don’t like to publish everything to the public places. I thought maybe the remux groups were the same. You signed in with another tab or window. those guys take forever and pay attention to the easy stuff like banding and artifacts looking for "transparent" encodes. Will I see any difference in quality between the remux and the encode? Interstellar. 5GB to 7 GB per episode. Though, depending on the source and encode type bit depth may be lost. The worst you may see is blocking in dark scenes. LOTR Extended edition 4K DV are pushing 100-130GB. I'm surprised at how much more efficient transcoding seems to be with Jellyfin Let’s say I have a 2tb hard drive with a 4k remux movie file. We would like to show you a description here but the site won’t allow us. The original was H. I used to think 720p YIFY is bomb a couple of years back, but now I've got better internet and 720p YIFY is unwatchable, so I use 2160p Joy and 1080p QxR. It will say either rc= crf (with the crf A remux is by definition not an encode and comparing different remux versions would, I believe, be a largely pointless exercise. They need to rewrite Plex's handling of 4k streams. Plex CHOKES very often. you're asking what the difference between euros and eggs is. Unfortunately I’ve had issues with the pro and miss the roku. LG plays about 1/3 of the 4K demo reels I threw at it because those usually test the limits of decoding (there's even one specific AV encoding the top Oppo players can't handle). it/8bddu7 So that kind of throws Plex encoding a remux to a reasonable bitrate for remote streaming out the window, right I Actually use encoded 4K rips more often anything encoded by somebody who knows what they are doing and encoding between CRF 14-17 (Depending on the film) will give you a quality encode that MOST people cannot tell Best 4k encodes vs remux for my setup Hey guys, so I'm setting up my plex server and I've been looking at torrents for 4k movies and I'm wondering what would be best, I dont have tons of storage and I'm seeing remuxes that are a lot of GB obviously then I'm seeing some encodes that are in the 20gb range but I've heard about 'tigole' being great which is quite low GB also. The biggest area I see quality problems is movies with lots of dark scenes as you really see the artifacts even with fairly good quality files. For example I watched thor ragnarok from a lossless remux vs his encode (just testing) on a 55 4k tv and honestly at where i was setting i couldn't notice a difference. Rip versions are higher and Remux ones are over 60GB. Good encodes (DON, SbR, etc) you will not notice the difference between the remux and the encode. 4k web-dl vs 1080 encode is a much tougher question though. Hopai79 • If you have a 4K HDR TV like LG CX or C2 OLED, almost always get Blu-ray encodes due to how they handle the color space and I will generally grab a PSA for the first watch and if i think it needs an upgrade i'll get Tigole when the bluray is encoded. The next big difference is Dolby Vision. BluRay. When comparing sizes the The remuxes have extreme noise that’s really distracting and actually discards some of the depth information of the scene. The only difference would be if author left out audio tracks and subtitles from the remux. I’ve used roku for years but went ahead and purchased a shield pro to handle 4K remux files. The other type of remux is where the movie, subtitles and audio tracks are packed into an mkV container. It goes for around $200 and it’s a beast for 4K transcoding. My thinking is that this potentially would be better than even a well encoded UHD copy, since Itunes likely compressed it from an uncompressed copy, while the UHD Bluray is already compressed, and then someone compressed it again. While a 1080 BD encode can average to be 1. They do take up to 24 hours to encode on my 4690k though Reply reply The debate between a 4K scan directors cut on Blu-ray VS a DCP 2k scan theatrical cut is one that I have yet to come to a decision on. A Scene Encode 2160p (with a smaller size) - Like with the same movie the Bluray REMUX is 91GB, but say a TIGOLE or NAHOM encode with a size of say 25-29 GB Use the 10 bit encoder. BluRay - Vague terminology, can be used for either a full bluray, remux or encoded release. 2. x265 is an encoded 4K BluRay. On the other hand, It means they’ve taken the video and audio from a 4K Bluray disc and converted it to mkv format without any re-encoding. Bluray could mean a lot of things perhaps a encode or maybe the full disk image you have to check the torrent files to be sure. One 4K REMUX with heavy motion only compressed from 70GB to 52GB. I ended up keeping the mkvcage because it was smaller, and I don't have much space. ⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements. The discs support both The i5 12600K has the excellent UHD770 QSV chip allowing for ~8-10 simultaneous 4K remux h265 dec to h264 enc @ 5-15Mbit/sec with tone mapping. 2014. It will be a 1080p encode. Let's say I want to create my OWN movie encode. Unless the source has some problems like dirty pixels and banding, and the encoder fixes them, the remux is always best. So visually both will be same. It is not encoded A remux is definitely encoded. Some torrented files are full 4K Bluray quality, others are compressed down. Filesize: Remux = 1GB vs. Then what the lower value CRF (0-16) encoding is good for? I have tested most of the usable CRF values (Including CRF 0). 7 mb/s the REMUX will have a much higher bits/pixel ratio and all things being equal would look better. Choose a movie which is native 4k. One is unencrypted the raw files off a disc. Hope this helps you. But it's still worth downloading the 4k version for the HDR. A remux is a direct extract from the source. 00 GB per episode a remux can be anywhere from 4. But on my laptop, it's practically indistinguishable. The encode only seems to fail when I try to HW encode this 4k remux. As for difference between nvenc and standard, while I did notice about a 1-2 stop difference on the quality meter - the difference in time to complete encoding and file size made it worth it to me. I tend to keep this as a separate copy, so I end up with an HDR10 and DV versions. These are the settings that seem most important (as far as I know): AV1 vs. If you have a solid tv and a great sounbar, you could use the REMUX. What do you guys think? Is the Let Handbrake encode, with the resulting file being HDR10 recognized. after a lot of tinkering I've found that having some extra parameters are worth it. I think hdr is the key to quality and makes even an encode worth watching over a 1080p remux. Reload to refresh your session. SOLUTION : [Blu-ray Ripping & Reading Metadata] Here's the Solutions, a step by step guide on how to encode a 4k Blu-ray to 1080p and still retain the Dolby goodness. I encoded a 1080P Blu-Ray movie using "CRF 0". I was fortunate enough to get a free RTX 2080 founders edition from NVIDIA and with my current system that reduces the re-encode time per hour of video to about 5-6 minutes. Up until now, all I needed to do was wait for a 1080p Remux version of a movie, Even if the WEB-DL version has a lower bitrate, if it's encoded more efficiently, And I cannot detect a difference either on my LG 77" CX OLED or 140" JVC 4K projector (or my 4K computer display for that matter) even when standing up close to the screen swapping back and forth really quick between the Remux and encode and pixel peeping. Correct. A lot of movies aren't real 4k. 1080p remux vs 2160p blu ray . Remux is the entire video file as it was encoded on the disk so there is no quality loss. Handbrake does not Remux MKV or MP4. ). 5 fps and qsv 70 fps. A blu-ray remux will always be higher quality than anything re-encoded. Question With some of these web-dls coming out at about 25 Mbps, we are approaching 1080p Bluray bitrates, Obviously WEB-DL won't approach the retail HEVC streams like you would find on a disc (or in an ISO/remux copy). I'm currently doing 4K CPU encoding in H265 10 Bit at a Constant Quality of 18 at Slow speeds for 4K Remux files. Both are processes in video editing, but both serve different functions. Another big thing I've noticed for encode vs remux is aspect ratios. I have been taking 4k remux, 4k encodes, 1080 remux and 1080 encodes and comparing quality by pixel peeping and watching and comparing while 6 feet away from the tv. 265 encoded with a . 5. Honestly I've rarely seen a difference in a 4k remux vs. they're just upscaled (you can go on blu-ray . Remuxing is the process of moving the content of a video from one container to another, which will drastically reduce the A 4k webrip could be larger than a 4k webdl from the same source due to the way screen recording works but itll be lower quality. You signed out in another tab or window. I am not sure how well -NAHOM conforms to standard naming practices, as the Italians usually play things a bit looser. How much of a benefit (quailty and file size) would the 4k source be over a 1080p remux than using the 1080p source into a smaller file? Furthermore, the 4K source you are encoding from is already a lossy encode, compared to the lossless or less lossy 4K or When I remux the 4K version I usually delete the 1080p unless there’s some wild issue if it looking inferior because of a bad scan or DNR or if the 4K is only the theatrical cut. i did some testing with 4k clips (raw quality) encoded to arc a380 qsv av1 and 4090 nvenc av1 vs hevc for both qsv and nvenc -- the average fps speed for av1 at best quality preset for both: nvenc 61. I've read some people say that they're still worth it because of the added HDR support in most of these cases, but 4k Web-dl vs 4k scene encode . Whether or not you’ll be able to tell a difference depends on the quality of your setup. I thought I was upgrading content but the 4k remux looks worse than 1080. A webdl is the entire video file as it was streamed via the website. But since anything that have HDR encode also have 4K UHD BD, so they will choose that over everything. I personally would always prefer a 1080p blu-ray remux over a 4k Rip. It is much faster (5-6x ) and also produces better quality h264/h265. Cropped and encoded from the JP Honestly I've rarely seen a difference in a remux vs. AVC(x264) is less efficient than HEVC(x265) by roughly half. HEVC. Private torrent sites will have them. they lose the sense of depth that a full remux has. A good encode half the size of the remux is usually hard to tell the difference. Why are the HDR movies much smaller than Remux? Is there a loss of A/V quality? I'm looking for the best quality settings to use for encoding via handbrake. It seems the easiest versus something like Megui. netflix for instance uses 5mbps which just can't cut it compared to 15-20mbps p2p encodes. After many attempts to quantify the output size and encode time impact of various settings, I have found the video content to largely drive encoding efficiency and prevent systematic projections. Dolby Vision, is an As the title says, I need help with uhd encodes on RARBG. With that said, a solid 1080p encode can be damn good and basically transparent, but I never know if a given encode will be, so I go with the remux. nvenc av1 and qsv av1 have very similar vmaf scores at various bitrates on best presets. Though if you plan to upgrade to a 4K set one day, you can go with the 2160p file. On smaller screens - 42” and less you may not notice the difference. h264 vs. One thing to consider would be that 4K is usually "encoded" in 10 bit colour range meaning it can have 4x the colour range of 8 bit, 256 colours vs 1024 colours. Remux movie is 49. If the 4k encode is less than, say, 50% larger than the 1080p encode then it'll depend on the movie - big budget sci-fi/fantasy then I'll probably grab the 4k but a romcom or something I'll just 4KBRs will often have less compression artifacts which (depending on encoding settings) may follow through into the encoded file the 4KBR might have a different transfer which may be of higher quality or different character (e. My 4K collection is growing pretty fast and I’ll likely have to get a 24TB HD soon for new remuxes. Except for the audio. Follow this order: 1080p bluray > 4k web-dl > 4k bluray > 1080p web-dl. But as a general rule this is pretty often true. 4k remux vs x265 encode bitrate question . . At the ideal viewing distance it's hard to spot a difference between a remux and a good compressed one. I watched a yify 4k encode of "Ford vs Ferrarri", which was less than 10GB, That’s a 4K WEB-DL size. if you want smaller files, go to something like 22) Encoder Preset: Medium Encoder Tune: None You have two encoding cycles (digital master->remux->BRRip). If you want to keep Dolby Vision, make use of DDVT Tool to extract it from the remux and inject it into the encode. I’m a big big fan of RARBG (I wish the site owner would’ve asked for help financially and seeing if the community would’ve chipped in before calling it quits. MKV container Custom resolution 1920x1080 (1080p) CRF 18 Preset Very Slow x265 or x265 10 bit for 4K Audio leave uncompressed orginal Once the encode has finished, I transfer all the color data from the remux to the encode using Nmkoder's color data transfer utility - This includes HDR metadata. The good news about adding/changing audio is it is very light vs For example, one good and cheap option is Beelink N100 mini PC. Tigole may be a bit smaller since they average around 7-22 gb per 4K movie but worth the shot. Remux it all together. 4k Bluray vs REMUX . The only real value in keeping the original remux is that in 10 years or whatever when a drastically better encoding standard is available you can re-encode it from the original, rather than performing lossy compression on an already lossy compressed file and compounding errors. it is as good of quality as the source contained. It also requires more processing power and time compared to remuxing. I acknowledge that others want the best of the best but I've had zero issues with what I'm watching. Video: Encoder: H. would the preference for archive be an HDR x265 encode with lower bitrate, One thing to note is that these are Webrips and not remuxes of the actual disc. Which would still amount to ~550GB of space Web-DL has - Worse image quality than 4k Remux So I usually use Handbrake to encode all of my videos, but things have changed now that I've started collecting 4k movies. The only difference was different patterns of grain on the borders of object. From what I understand, even though Handbrake has 10bit options, it doesn't fully support HDR content and will lose that information (someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that). Unless it's 4K Material you probably have enough storage. Some blu ray players, such as the panny ub820 have fantastic hdr tone mapping. 7. Publication date 1971-07-24 Topics Godzilla, Hedorah, Kaiju, Toho, Yoshimitsu Banno Language Japanese Item Size 19. And since the space tradeoff is often between ~~55GN I've found that a remux of a movie, say with 25-30 gb file size looks better than an encode with 11-12 gb size. WEB. As long as there is no re-encoding there is absolutely no difference between the original and the remuxed (ISO/MKV) version. Assuming I go down the REMUX road, I've also read that a lot of movies' 4K releases aren't the 'real thing' because they haven't been made from actual 4k masters, and are just studio upscales from ~2K masters. Just like a full remux aren’t encoded to a smaller compressed file. None. Open the file in MediaInfo and compare the settings with that table. Happy to be corrected here but if you’re looking for remuxes for ultimate archival quality then you should find these unedited copies are identical, irrespective of who the release group is. The file is the same but the device is different. So far I have been downloading REMUX releases of 4k movies, but I'm slowly running out of space on my drives, so I started researching about how much quality do I lose, by downloading compressed releases from SWTYBLZ and Terminal. I'd upgrade to the best x900(XT) CPU your board supports. Reply reply [deleted] • Hmm, ok I’ll try to cut out a 5-10 minute slice of a UHD REMUX and encode that down and post the logs later tonight. A quality 1080p HDR encode that is sourced from a 4k bluray will be transparent at normal viewing distances. Encode video with the same crop offset as the original untouched rpu file. What quality you want is based on how big of a screen you have and how close you are when you watch videos. There’s two ways. If you change Media Info's view from Tree to Text, scroll sideways along the Encode Settings list, and you will eventually see the method of encoding. 5 times larger (110GB) than the Blu-Ray source. Very sad to see it go). Proper Encode = ~450MB If you need to save some space you should encode. would the 'x265-4K-limited 'bitrate'' encoding be much worse than the blu-ray encoding ? Of course the 1080p is the resolution. Yes, you can tell the difference, especially on a large size tv. Step 1 is to not download the 4k light junk in your first example. Seems like older movies getting 4k releases are affected. Would the quality of a 4K Blu ray played through a Blu Ray Player connected to a Receiver be better than a 4k Remux file played on an Nvidia Shield The i5 12600K has the excellent UHD770 QSV chip allowing for ~8-10 simultaneous 4K remux h265 dec to h264 enc @ 5-15Mbit/sec with tone mapping. I don't notice much of a difference between 25gb 4k compressed or remux copies. But even if you are viewing on a top notch tv, a remux and a large encode would have no difference visually. The big difference is while both software and hardware quality can be good, the hardware encoders barely save much in file size while i can halve the file size in software encode. I am running some tests to get a feel for size and quality of each, Remux is irrelevant to your question. The output ended up 2. . REMUX is definitely something for the long run. Reply I just went from a 1080 priojector to a sony 4k 65 inch tv. Even on my 42 inch tv, I couldn't tell them apart. I would go for the REMUX, maybe delete some after, or buy extra storage. I understand that 4k files will be at least 4 x times larger than a 1080p equivalent (if we don't count the hdr data), but for instance my copy of blade runner in 4k is 50 times larger than my 1080p version and all I am doing is looking at optimizing this all. The Blu-ray itself is already (almost always) a loss of quality from the original source recording, so I don't see the point in storing a 20 - 50 GB file when an 8 - 15 GB file will rival the quality at NOTE: for 2022 – Plex has come a long way since this FAQ was originally written, HW transcoding has become more available and more stable, and tone mapping was recently added to address the hdr/sdr color conversion issues. The smaller files are compressed. This is WAYYY too big for my little server (2-4TB right now). He mentions this: 4k DoVi/HDR10 (HVEC Main 10) > 1080P (H264) - Transcode . REMUX: A rip of Blu-ray or HD DVD disk to another container format or just stripping the disc of menus and bonus material while keeping the contents of its audio and video streams I want to know if the difference between a remux file and a rip is 4K HDR Blu Ray remux 43,6 GB vs 4K HDR 10+ BluRay rip 5,39 GB? Question It was encoded with crf, so the bitrate fluctuates to keep a constant quality. I start with either ripping my own or hand picking a source from an already ripped remux, then encode at a bitrate just above where I see a noticeable difference for the same set of frames. Question I recently bought a 4K TV and I have a question. 1-FGT With 1080p REMUX 25. I use average bitrate setting because I can never get constant quality at the right file size, and my settings are around 6,500 for 4k content. Maybe if I did stills but who knows. I can HW encode any non-4K file without issue. I used to reencode my blue rays now I leave them as remux and my 4k I always try to keep remux Depends on the person. I would compare apples to apples, ie a remux to a remux (or compressed to compressed). The second pert is the code used to compress the video. Discussion Hey all, I'm having a debate with a friend; Are 4k bluray remuxes of any less quality than the actual 4k disk? Like if the file has roughly 40gb++ depending on the movies length, is tagged with "REMUX" and is by a somewhat known or reputable ripgroup it should be an actual exact copy of the disc IIRC, they were just 2-pass slow settings, aq-mode was changed to 3, I think. 4k encode vs 1080p encode? I'd never get the smaller 4k unless the 1080p is stupidly large I guess but then it's just the same situation as a remux. 5- 2. Some people just don't have the resources to watch 4k in gull Remux quality. Yeah if you download certain 4k remux it will be a file format (mkv) that the player will not be able to play for that I recommend using emby I've been solving the 4K issue by avoiding 4K media until such a time comes in which we can remove the physical part of the legally acquired media. As alternative, I can download the Web-DL with DD+ Atmos. 480p>720p>1080p>2160p(4k) Remux is an untouched BluRay. DTS-HD. A x264 encode for this movie would be fine at 3GB. Can people really tell the difference between a 25 gb digital movie and the same film remux at 50gb+? I’ve been encoding my UHD movie library to x265 on an i7-10700 w 64gb of ram, testing RF18 and RF20, fast, medium, and slow presets. (Such as TERMiNAL releases) BDRip - Encoded from the remux. These movies are typically around 40-60gb, or even larger depending on the movie. A streaming service is trying to optimize bandwidth usage and overall customer satisfaction w/ quality. Remuxing is very different from encoding. From what I have learned, I have not seen a reason to use CRF values below The YAS-207 Yamaha Soundbar does specify for the DTS output. 4K HDR x265 vs 4K x264 . Movies that are remuxed with no re-encoding an no extras or other "junk" are about 20 - 30 Gig (or higher) - big difference but at the cost of higher quality. Framestor is a remux group so those would be pretty high file sizes, around 40-100 gb. My entire library is 4k UHD and 1080p BR rips. g. 7G . Checking dark frames, and motion frames too and don't see a difference in detail. If you have the storage space, sure, keep the 4K REMUX files and play them, blissfully unaware that you can, in fact, Hate to muddy the waters but most 1080p files use the old h264 encoding, whereas most I think 15,000kbps is a really high bitrate for a re-encode. i could be wrong , what is your thought ? Yeah it's great, download a remux and a high quality encode and compare for yourself. For me its because of his encode quality vs the size. Reply reply [deleted] • No, 1080p scales cleanly into 4k so it should be fine. Depends on the source of the Web-DL and the encode. But when it comes to 4K, things (mainly storage) start to change your perspective. This part means that it is a file with both dolby vision and hdr10, devices that can read dolby vision profile 7/8 will play it as dolby vision, everything else 4k encodes look flat to me. People like me will choose Good HDR encode, which many will argue is better than SDR Remux, especially if it's filtered where needed with good encoding parameters. for me plex streaming for 4K remuxes is so inconsistent even on direct play. is there a huge difference Indeed, on my current 55" 4k Samsung TV, I can't see a difference at ~7ft, so I just go for the encodes. You should end up with 3000-6000 kbps for 4K which is way lower than HEVC would go, with equal or Hopefully others can offer suggestions, but I've yet to see a 1080p encode (of a 4K Blu-ray), that looked as balanced, colorwise, as those from a 1080p Blu-ray source. LG 55CX / Denon AVR-X2400H / Q Acoustic 2050's + 2000C + 2070S + 2020's / Sony BDP-S5200 (Region A) / Panasonic DP-UB450EB / Nvidia SHIELD 16Gb / Xbox Series X / PS5 - x264 1080p Blu-ray Remux - x265 4K web-DL I guess the BEST source in my use case will be the Remux for obvious reasons. This may need the steps of demuxing and remuxing so that the re-encoding process works on video-only and audio-only streams, rather than trying to re-encode the contents of a multiplex directly. Next time only And you probably won't be able to tell the difference between the Remux and a 4k reencode if you're needing to ask about Between a remux and an encode, I'll always get the remux. Whereas, encodes have minimal buffering. Encoder tune grain for somewhat more efficient grain preservation. I didn't say that that, either. 39 GB, while the same movie in 2160p. This makes software encode ideal for long term storage by converting all the raw footage and at the same time remove things like noise. A real quality 4K REMUX is anything between 45-80GB. BRRip - Means it has been re-encoded from an existing bluray encode, which results in further quality loss compared to a regular bluray encode (which itself is encoded from the full bluray/remux): https://redd. The files score higher in PSNR, SSIM and VMAF metrics (they look better), they are 30% smaller in size and take around 40% less encoding time compared to having the exact same settings without any advanced options. Question about 4K WEB-DL vs 1080p Remux . I can SW encode this 4K file without issue. I have studied the results vs the source files in-depth, and I cannot find ReEncoding is changing some aspect of the format (eg. This post 4K HDR Movies: A Pirates Guide : Piracy (reddit. To be honest, I don’t see very much difference between them, even on a 110″ screen. Encoder preset veryfast or slow are the only two that make much sense. Your second example with the low bitrate is also not a remux. You want to use CPU for the best results. I now have to choose between keeping files in 4K or converting to 1080p and then what quality profile to use. Also, it would need to be from an untouched 4K remux to make it worth considering. The second one has a 7. 1. TrueHD. Ad for the REMUX or encode, it depends. However, re-encoding offers greater control over the video and audio quality, allowing users to fine-tune the output to their specific needs. If so, what's the best way to encode so that I am still getting perfect 4k quality while being able to slim down the stored 4k file. I'm trying to encode a 4k HDR remux to AV1 via HW, but my attempts to encode fail. Ltd. Any I have a 4K HEVC remux which I would like to scale down to 1080p, but without loosing any quality, FFmpeg is the leading multimedia framework, able to decode, encode, transcode, mux, demux, stream, filter and play pretty much anything that humans and machines have created. Hi, im thinking of upgrading some of my downloaded movies to 4k and im wondering if i should go for the remux versions or the encoded versions? im seeing remux versions at 50-70GB and other options there for 15-25GB and i dont want to be able to notice a dip in quality and the hdr being off especially if im upgrading to 4k for the better quality and hdr. com) basically recommends bitrates of 20 Mbps or higher to get better than streaming quality but I've found that a lot of streaming movie content is at this level or slightly higher now. I'd go for the large encode. I watch on an OLED as well in a home theater setup. 4. Reply reply A remux is the actual, bit for bit file from the disc just without the intro/legal. MA. Most encodes online that I've seen specify the source type in the title and encoding formats in the information. Godzilla vs. Non-DV H265 is encoded ~12MB/s for video DV Encodes are ~24 MB/s With the increase bitrate, quality should be better maintained within. Good encodes crop the video to remove the black bars which means they can properly be viewed using plex, etc. Even your NVENC result is suspiciously slow. REMUX. That’s a full remux. 265 12 bit, and H. See which gives the speed you're happy with, then find the RF you're happy with the size of (don't be afraid to go high! the mid to high 20s can be acceptable at 4K). Name. Download encode and remux and find out if you can tell the difference. the HDR looks especially off. So all of that goes into my archive and will be seeded til kingdom come (or 8K or whatever). a complete 1to1 ripped from a BluRay that hasn't been reencoded. 1. Hedorah (1971) 4K UHD Encode + Eng Subs by Toho Co. I tried H. If an encode is done right, chances are slim you will notice a difference. I guess the BEST source in my use case will be the Remux for obvious reasons. Look for the overall bitrate. Inject the cropped rpu file with a new encoded cropped file. Aspect Ratio is something to look out for. Read more about Plex 4K transcoding here, and here you will find good Plex Server examples with prices. As an example - It will allow ~8 With tubes and 2017 pro, Kodi is always the fastest with heavy 4k streams. The good quality + lower space taken up is an attractive option. if it's been DNR'ed) which may 2. noob question, is there any difference in watching a downloaded 4k remux or a $300-400 uhd player with a $30 physical 4k bluray? Skip to main content. Media Info will show you. That could mean a difference compared to a device steaming a remux. The first 4 ‘rules’ generally are no longer as important as they once were, but may still be a good thing to bear in mind. If storage space is a concern then you should probably skip remuxes and grab encodes. I always prefer REMUXES over any encode, anyday. h. I do notice the quality difference between a remux and a good encode - hence I still opt for remuxes. HDR. resolution or codec type) such that it needs to be uncompressed and recompressed. Through troubleshooting, the issue appears to lie with this specific file. h264 10-bit vs. 85gb plus Make sure you dont confuse webrip with webdl, those are not the same thing. I'm trained to see the difference between 4K and HD for my job, you can clearly see better resolution plus the difference between SDR and HDR. How many blurays are you talking?. As for quality, I doubt you will see a difference even on a 4K screen. The reason why I’ve put 4k web-dl before 4k bluray is that 4k web-dl has more than enough bandwidth for a 1080p display so 4k bluray will be overkill. 4K + DV will be the best thing you can get for many, many years. File size does correlate with heavy motion sequences; it appears that's where the file size saving is the least. With the roku only having a 10/100 port, i know the remux bitrate can sometimes go over 100mb and cause Generally, using a GPU to handle conversions of permanent files is frowned upon. I I have heard that if you encode correctly that it's indistinguishable from the remux 4k file. The biggest difference would be seen between webdl and the remux as the webdl almost certainly doesn't have enough bitrate. Most 4K is upscaled (especially when cgi heavy) from the source anyway so its really the hdr that adds the deep color and contrast to make the pq look far superior to the sdr when done right. 265 encoder, however the filesize is consistent with a 4k remux. Remuxing is the process of moving the content of a video from one container to another, which will 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 difference between REMUX that is 85Gb and 3 GB encode is the bitrate. You switched accounts on another tab or window. 06 recognized file. it just looks like the encode lost a bunch of detail. 4k really depends on the bitrate of the encode. A 4K lower bit rate encode is gaining you little, if anything, over a 1080p Blu-ray remux. Reply reply It seems to me that around 600 4k remux's will be around 30tb. 3. on the other hand, the smaller 265/264 files appear to be smoothing Finally upgraded to 4K tv and started the process of upgrading my library to 4K. As for the HDR part, both use HDR (as you said) so your theather set-up must be able to handle it. GPU's have encoders that are designed specifically to do decoding and encoding fast at the expense of quality and compression efficiency. Use the Multiplexer option of MKVToolNix to remux in the previously demuxed second video stream in to the new HDR10 file just transcoded. Atmos. Another approach is desktop PC and NVidia GPU. 03 GB. 265 may be able to handle the large file size by reducing the impact while maintaining visual quality but encoding is If you do need to transcode - then the iGPU's UHD 750 is a very worthwhile upgrade over the UHD 630 wrt quicksysnc. just a worse image overall regardless of I'm no longer as concerned with the encoding times, so I'm looking for what settings are most important to preserve quality and lower file size. I tried encoding some 4K HDR files using Handbrake and they look washed out. I always try and get the full remux if possible however this isn't an If you have the space/bandwidth then fine, but I compared a remux of Infinity War to a CRF17 HDR encode and was hard pressed to see much difference between the two on a 65" OLED at about 6-7ft away. 5M subscribers in the Piracy community. h265 (10 Pastebin your encoding log, <1 fps seems low even for 4K x265 on a 2600. With an encode, you will virtually always see a long list of Encode settings, example - cabac=1 / ref=3 / deblock=1:0:0 / analyse=0x3:0x113 / me=umh / subme=9 etc. There's no such thing as what you see in movies that "enhance" pictures or movies that were already blurry. I'd up the bframes to ≥8 in Handbrake's Advanced Options and maybe zone the credits too, especially if they're long, at I can download GoT as 4K Blu Ray Remux (with lossless Atmos, which I really appreciate) with 25 GB/Ep on UHD movies. But ofc there is use cases for encodes, too: mobile devices, limited space because you're only just starting out, etc. So it has lost quality, if you want to go for the best use the REMUX version. You have an SDR display so just ignore HDR. In the case I I mean that if I play a Remux, PotPlayer indicates the resolution as 1920x1080p and if I play an encode, the resolution is 1920x800p though they both have the black bars at Remuxing is very different from encoding. Definitely the 4K version, the Blu-ray release from 2010 should be avoided at all costs and the 2008 release is OOP and quite dated but still the better of the two Blu-ray releases. Handbrake 1. mkv Format : Matroska Format version : Version 4 File size : 57. Just not *re-*encoded by a third party. x264 and x265 are not codecs, they're libraries used to encode to a codec (h264 or h265). General Complete name : Movie. I have a 65 inch 1080p screen, There's little use in a downscaled 4K over native HD. Remux vs encode. 1 DTS surround sound track, but no indications of HDR support. I always thought encodes are compressed versions of the remux, but I have been reading that 4K encodes are not noticeable from 4K remuxes. There are more variables than that, such as encoding settings. so PSA 1080p vs QXR 1080p on 4K TV/Display, is the difference that big that you'd notice it and the extra 2-3GBs of QXR so no matter which release even a 1080p BD REMUX will look bad on a 4K display With 4K remuxes, Plex stutters with Intel QuickSync Hardware transcoding if PGS subtitles are burned into the video, but with Jellyfin I can do 4K w/ substitles with plenty of headroom to spare (70% CPU vs 110%+ with Plex). i feel like HDR highlights and lighting should seamlessly blend with the rest of the picture but when the movie is encoded at a lower bitrate, the areas with HDR zones stick out unnaturally and feel like the only part of the movie with Ordinarily the x265 tag is reserved encodes, as x265 is the name of the H. HDR or not, the video will play the same on an SDR display. Will the quality look exactly the same compared to a 4k disc What will look better in 1080p HD, a blu-ray encoding in 1080p or 4k UHD disc encoded to 1080p? upvotes Same with 4K REMUX and compressed versions. I would say in general I'd trust scene/p2p to make higher quality encoding choices than a streaming service. The difference in filesize between them is insignificant relative to the total amount of storage needed for 200 UHD movies. Also keep in mind that sometimes files have to be encoded a certain way depending on the device you're playing back on (For example, playing back an mkv directly on an LG OLED requires DTS audio and Dolby Vision video to be remuxed to play correctly) Remuxes all the way my friend. Like transcoding, re-encoding can result in quality loss due to the compression and decompression stages. com to check. 264 10 bit, and they all ended up looking washed out compared to the original file. I have a 4K TV. 0 GiB Duration : 2 h 15 min Overall bit Decomb will revert the encode to 8-bit, so you should probably just turn it off. Here is what I'm thinking will yield really good quality on my 1080p and 4K encodes. But apples to apples, it would then depend on how you watch the content. :D remux has the highest I've grabbed the 1080p remux for Lower Decks mainly cause I wanted the audio commentary but even though it's animation I can see the difference. say which source it is per the rules but recently I found the amazon web-dl of the show was far better than the bluray-remux. At that bitrate a two hour clip will be 5. H265 is 18. I have decided that the quality difference is not worth the increase in space. 2160p. SWTYBLZ i’ve had decent luck with, pretty good quality for a 4K encode. It is not reencoded compared to the bluray, its the same thing but as an mkv. I do not know if this is right, but just wanted to know you guys's input on An encoder wrote this in their nfo for a 1080p encode for a recent movie, comparing the blu ray with a 4k WEB-DL: The film has a lot of dark scenes, 4k web source has better PQ, especially in dark and flat areas, and less bandings and blockings, and also there are more details in 4k web source, and bd is vague in many details and scenes, so I chose and encode from web source. Quality is based mostly on bitrate. I usually pick two dark frames, two light frames, two high action frames and two stationary frames and compare the result with an unencoded frame. Using this, I end up a DV 07. If you decide to encode, make sure you are using proper settings: I am setting up a FileFlow to auto-encode remux video files to my own settings (removing black bars, foreign languages, ect. It shouldn't make a difference which app you use as it's all using the same decoding chips. 5mb/s and 4K WEB-DL 14. What is looked down upon, as severely degrading the quality, are encodes that use the BRRip as a source because then you have three cycles of lossy encoding (digital master->remux->BRRip>new encode) Lastly, there is no such thing as "optimally compressed". Assuming the encode is x264 thats very low bitrate for 4k. 2019. If its x265 and the 1080p encode is x264 then maybe consider the 4k but thats still pretty low. It will likely be in h264 or h265 for the codec. This is 7GB/Ep. The first one looks like an x265 HDR encode, and it's quite compressed so there will likely be significant quality loss. On a 65” 4K OLED at the viewing distance I sit at I can definitely tell the difference. So they will choose 1080p SDR Remux over HDR encode. 265 10-Bit (x265) Framerate: Constant framerate, Same as Source Quality: Constant quality, 20 RF (there's room for preference. That's not a remux, but is an encode. none of the 2160p HDR flicks are Remux much smaller file sizes compared to Remux most releases are WEB H265 For example, a 2160p. Depends if you want to have something for the long run or not. I have a pretty good eye for detail, but I can't see a constantly noticeable difference between remux 4K and properly encoded 4K. Will you upgrade your set-up in the future? Storage is getting cheaper every year and technology also improves. So a remux playing on one device vs a disc playing in a different device. A 720p encode with absurd bitrate wont benefit past a certain point, so it might look worse than a 4k encode with slightly lower bitrate. 265 10 bit, H. jicvk dcel yqtc lyb msxyca mmucs rzh zmjdz dwyoiz gsecve