Lu Perry - Should I re-encode the HQ releases to reduce their size? - Comments

Please leave the HQ as is! I

BloodRED — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 02:42:34 -0600

Please leave the HQ as is! I love the hi-res stuff!

NO reencode for your current releases

farhan982 — Thu, 13 Jul 2006 01:27:24 -0500

I think I would vote NOT to re-encode any of your current releases.Usually fansubbers change their encoding technique when starting a new season or project. Not in the middle of a project coz it will effect the quality and the impression given by the series in the season as it is a continuous eps.

Although the quality changes may be reduce insignificantly to gain smaller size, but you cannot deny the fact that it does change.Your releases is already in high quality! so why downgrade?I was hoping that the quality will be maintained without any changes throughout the whole season especially for .hack root.Moreover the .hack root got around 26eps and your eps1-13 can be fit in one DVD.So the season will fit just nice in my 2 DVD collection. So I will prefer for you not to reencode. But in the end, it's your choice as the encoder. I'll support your your choice and releases as long as it does not downgrade in terms of quality(at least not that significant like some other subs)

Haruhi

Zero — Sat, 08 Jul 2006 08:01:55 -0500

Even if you're not willing to sub Haruhi, maybe you can just sub episode 12? I'm sure that's the one every one really wants in HQ. ^^

What? lol Then this is

Zeth — Sat, 08 Jul 2006 04:42:27 -0500

What? lol Then this is absolutely not a scene that will display the loss very good...

Despite the fact that it's actually not the same frame, lu.

I was not able to open the video in VirtualDubMod due to an unknown codec(where can you download your codec?) to tell you the exact frame difference.

Anyway....

HG FTW

Ichi — Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:46:53 -0500

I could care less of the size give be the bestquality and ill download even a 1gb file of an episode

no, second one is the

luperry — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 09:02:31 -0500

no, second one is the re-encoded one.

Sorry for

Zeth — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 05:17:36 -0500

Sorry for double-commenting.

The 1st one is the re-encoded roots. You can see jpeg artefacts at the edges of Ovan's glasses, also around any other edges. And there are white/gray colored blocks in Shino's hat.

Both scenes are low-motion scenes, hence scences with high motion will be worse.

Hm... you have a point

Zeth — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 04:56:05 -0500

Hm... you have a point re-encoding them in two-pass.

But re-encoding is ALWAYS connected to a loss of quality, even if you don't see it.

And if it takes as long as the seeding the huge file, why bother? Most HQ videos of that length are above 250MB anyway!?

In addition I think fansub crews in other countries rely upon your releases in hq.

Btw. I have an Athlon XP 2400+ and your videos still T^T run smoothly with over 95% cpu-usage in WMP6 using ffdshow; the VLC player could not render them in time meaning all laggy. Please do not increase CPU-usage anymore!

by "script", I meant bash

luperry — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 21:00:16 -0500

by "script", I meant bash script, perl script, and crontab. I use them to automate some tedious tasks(I don't use windows by the way, the only time I've used virtualdubmod was when I hardsubbed ar-tonelico, and I used vmware to run windows back then, not a pleasant experience).

no, I didn't do pre-processing, doing so you'll have the illusion that it looks good because the picture looks smooth and sharp, but you would lose a lot of details you won't even notice.

quote from wikipedia: "The intent of the H.264/AVC project was to create a standard that would be capable of providing good video quality at bit rates that are substantially lower (e.g., half or less) than what previous standards would need (e.g., relative to MPEG-2, H.263, or MPEG-4 Part 2),"

so I guess the codec does affect how much MB you need to obtain a certain quality, though it may be contravertial as "quality" is not well defined.

I encode using an abacus :)

TheCrazyCanuck — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 20:48:34 -0500

I guess if you do pre-processing on the video then re-encoding would be fine (I assumed you didn't). I still think at the resolution you want to keep you should target 233MB or greater no matter what codec you use.

Sure scripts are great I used them all the time with virtualdubmod for my pre-processing. But I never blindly threw a script in without fine tuning it so that in itself is a lot of work. Lucky for you though you have good sources so you don't have too many issues with the source to begin with.

"you must haven't experienced with H.264 that much(an upgrade would be nice)."

Back in those days xvid and divx were the standard so I never encoded anime using it. In a R&D setting I've been looking into hardware h.264 optimizations to do real-time encoding so I guess I "upgraded" long ago...

it's the same for me

luperry — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 16:06:27 -0500

it's the same for me actually, it either takes longer to encode or takes longer to seed.

File Size

nifear4 — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 15:47:43 -0500

Knowing that the file size was too big, and making it smaller is probably better for us, since we want to watch anime subs fast/fan-subs. but it's probably best on what you decide, because if it takes longer for you, then it might be hellish for you

a bit more work for the

luperry — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 12:55:58 -0500

a bit more work for the computer, not for me. from download to encode, that's all done by a script without my intervention.

normally I would just check the Download folder to see if the files(the RAW and the re-encoded XviD I will be using for timing) are there, if they are, then I'll start to time and translate, after I'm done, another script would put everything together into the final release(I would be issuing the command in this case).

quite painless really.

why re-encode?

SunBlade — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 10:22:23 -0500

i got a 0.5tb file/torrent server specialy for animes.

so it doesn't matter to me if you reencode the hq vids or not.

i'm just curious why would you want to reencode the vids?
if you don't already have enought work, i could think of something ;) .

anyway, as long as you don't reduce the quality you can do to the vid whatever you want.
but afaik without reducing quality a three-pass encode can cut the size of the vid-stream only by ~10%-15% in comparison to a single-pass (based on webcam footage).

it's your choice, i'wont complain.

No reencode please! I really

Anonymous — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:01 -0500

No reencode please! I really appreciate to have the raws without touching them.

The diference may not be at a still image because it's about smooth HQ quality viedeos.

Should I re-encode the HQ releases to reduce their size?

luperry — Tue, 04 Jul 2006 00:56:39 -0500

* Yes\n* No\n