New v.2\. How to encode h264 to get best playback?
-
Thanks for reminding about the handbrake, indeed.
However I would like to see some tips about the settings as well. I am able to produce imageless video in many instances. But good results too. Only the gamma is a bit screwed comparing to the original. Has anybody used Advanced settings? It would be great to get this info into knowledge base how to make the best h264.some stuff to dig intohttp://mattgadient.com/2013/06/12/a-best-settings-guide-for-handbrake-0-9-9/ -
For the videos I need to be able to reverse/jump to frame etc. the bottom line is NOT to use H264 still? Inversely, a high-quality smooth one-directional playback is the only case one should use h264. Right?
What about HAP in the above scenarios?--8 -
As far as I understand only h264 and ProRes are special by AVFoundation. So for reversing and jumping one should use ProRes.
HAP is pretty fast by itself played with Quicktime or AVF. -
@eight, you are correct in saying that reverse playback and jumping are not good in AVFoundation. And jumping is not good in AVFoundation in general. (See my comparison at ISADORA 2.0 QUICK START: MOVIE PLAYBACK)
As a rule, reverse playback will not be good for any codec where frame _n+1_ relies (at least in part) on frame _n_ to be decoded first, which is true for H264 and MP4.For efficient reverse playback and jumping, you want a codec where each frame can be decompressed without referencing any other frames. That's true for Apple ProRes, Photo JPEG, DV, and Animation, as well as HAP. So HAP would be a fine choice to replace Photo JPEG for reverse and/or jumping around.However, @vanakaru you are partially correct about what AVFoundation will play. It also supports Photo JPEG and DV, though I don't see these as being any more efficient than QuickTime. For sure, AVFoundation can't play HAP and Animation.But as noted in the KB article above, AVFoundation has many drawbacks when it comes to interactivity. In short: AVFoundation is at its best when it's playing a movie forward at normal speed; when you do that, it can be super efficient. But for anything else, you may still need QuickTime.I hope that makes things clearer.Best Wishes,Mark -
My results (running 10.8.5) are so far favoring...
AppleProRes or H264 in AVFoundation / Performance playback mode
HAP in Quicktime / Interaction playback modeMost of my performance clips are NTSC 30fps Photo Jpeg, so that means I have lot of transcoding to do.
Does anyone have recommendations for a high quality batch encoder?
I have generally used Compressor from Final Cut 7 Studio suite, for batch exporting, and Final Cut Pro or QKT 7 when I only have a few files to convert, but I am sure there must be other good options?Jamie
-
Since handbrake seems to do very nice job, it may be the best
http://www.osomac.com/2013/08/08/handbrake-adds-real-batch-processing/ -
I use extensively Compressor and I find it perfect for the job, presets for codec and destination, can be used directly from FCPX, good quality. I find Handbrake a bit more difficult to tune for my needs and to produce all the different setting I need (vimeo, blue ray, archive, isadora with hap or h264…). But surely mac only…
-
I've used QTAmateur for years;-) It's mac only. https://www.mikeash.com/software/qtamateur/
-
Could you post some good settings you use as well. It is obvious that there are many good apps for the task. That is the reason I started this discussion - so many apps with so many settings. I have seen spectacular quality h264 video but blotchy crap as well. As long we can not tell to the app: "make me fabulous video" lets talk about Mbs and b-frames.
Also if I use AE default settings for instance I do not get acceptable results(for h264). The same is true with many other apps as well. I think that all the different apps are just a face and it does not matter witch one to use - the work is done by the same algorithm in anyway. However some apps may provide good presets. And some apps have no option to tinker with presets.One more thing - how much the setting depend of the content? Will fast and lotsa moving video need different settings than slow one? -
@john I have not used QTA for years because it opens the movie only as large as you screen is. You can render the movie to the size you need, but often I forget to check the size and I need to redo specially if my movie is larger. Also it is one of the slowest among the ones I have used(Mpeg Streamclip, handbrake, Quicktime 7, AE).
-
If I use something originated in AVC/H.264 video format, the best I've being using in the past few years is 5dtorgb (http://rarevision.com/5dtorgb/) to convert to DPX, ProRes and DNxHD otherwise Compressor
-
QTAmateur is one of the slowest:-( The only reason I still use it was that I liked Photo-Jpeg clips for Izzy and some of the fastest batch compression algorithms didn't have Photo-Jpeg as an output option. At one point I tried Wondershare Video Converter Ultimate to try and get a super fast batch compression work flow but like I said it was one of a few render options that didn't work with Photo-Jpeg. The Wondershare Video Converter works really well for other codecs though. It has a lot of useful presets and handles multiple videos at once;-)
-
I use MPEG Streamclip a lot for batch converting. I use it a lot to rescale videos to a half-res version when I can get away with a lower res option to increase playback. I've also had good results using it to convert to Photo-JPEG and Apple Prores. It can also convert to H.264 and MP4 as well as HAP, but I haven't done much testing to see the quality of those conversions...
-
There is some good info here about H264.
It suggests that Quicktime Pro is a better quality H264 export than Compressor, but there is a lot of good info in the article to look into.
It lists two other encoders worth looking at, as X264 and MainConcept, neither of which am I familiar with.
http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Editorial/What-Is-.../What-is-H.264-74735.aspxThere is also a chart comparing software encoders near the bottom of their very long technical wiki ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC
The first column shows QT for encoding.
It goes into a lot of detail about B-Frames and other complexities.After reading these two articles, I also conclude that HandBrake is using the high quality (award winning) X264 open source algortihms to encode to H264.
So HandBrake and Quicktime Pro seem to be the best quality options from the texts I have read so far.But all of this does lead to the inevitable question: what re the best SETTINGS in HandBrake or QKT7 Pro for use in Isadora movie playback?
And that means doing some tests. I believe Mark already did a large number of these kinds of tests already... but we need to publish some advice on this, imho.jamie
Perhaps we need an Isadora online tutorial on codec compression tools for Mac and WIndows users?
-
@jamie Thank you, thank you! Finally I got some excellent information.
The article you point to is very good indeed and easy to understand. While WiKi is most up to date but overwhelming as such.My tests with Handbrake are very promising as well. It works very fast and quality is good. however I have been able to get imageless video with some settings. But I haven't had time to run systematic tests yet.The reason starting this topic was precisely that: to get people test results together and find the preferable options. You tutorial idea is very welcome. -
Just as an added note, my test files use: MainConcept h264, and Sony AVC (h264), (in MP4 wrappers)I am also adding this for additional testing: http://x264vfw.sourceforge.net/ since ffmpeg is a popular standard. -
Just saw this article... apparently Adobe Premiere does a rather bad job of exporting H264.. who knew!
http://www.nofilmschool.com/2014/09/massive-difference-export-quality-fcpx-and-premiere-pro
