View Single Post
Old 14th July 2021, 15:08   #9  |  Link
Emulgator
Big Bit Savings Now !
 
Emulgator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: close to the wall
Posts: 1,531
What Boulder said: Give the encoder time for precision ! I am using at least x264 veryslow, x265 slower and can suggest that with confidence.

Seeing stills only...anyway for such content type I would call 4,5Mbps @ FHD starved for x264, wet patches coming up where HF coefficients had been dropped and LF coefficients sustain.

If someone must have 4,5Mbps on that clip, 265 will try hard to impersonate grain and seems to do a bit better.
test 3 and 4 are quite close for 4,5Mbps.

(Parameter "tune grain" means encoder is allowed to throw in some calculation-cheap HF coefficients, not really encode whats given.
Lots of Blu-ray encodes have introduced such morphing grain which often moves with Luma borders. Strange to the eye.)


NVEnc just slips off my table into the mud, happy to see QSV cope better.

I would just give more bitrate and move on.
Only if you need to sail along that cliff of damage for educational reasons, well...

I would use zopti for that.
__________________
"To bypass shortcuts and find suffering...is called QUALity" (Die toten Augen von Friedrichshain)
"Data reduction ? Yep, Sir. We're that issue working on. Synce invntoin uf lingöage..."

Last edited by Emulgator; 14th July 2021 at 15:36.
Emulgator is offline   Reply With Quote