View Single Post
Old 12th March 2020, 21:02   #8  |  Link
Sharc
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
But would the "DVD-shrink" method primarily save time or would the quality be better than a similar size full decode re-encode? Given how fast processors are now for H.264 is it worth the effort for just a speed gain (if that's all it is)? I mean my R9-3950X can do a blu-ray spec "veryslow" encode at 50+FPS (18Mbit/sec).
I always find it a bit doubtful or unfair when people take the encoding speed (cost of time, energy consumption ....) out of the equation and compare the visual quality of ultrafast methods (GPU, or maybe requant etc.) with slow or veryslow settings of current CPU methods just to find out that the latter is superior. But of course I accept that the compromise between speed and visual quality is a personal decision .
The interesting aspect with the proposed alternatives is that one could possibly expect blazing encoding speeds without relying on expensive GPU (or CPU) hardware.
Just guessing, I would assume that for low compression the quality can be quite good (similar experience as with former DVD-Shrink). Unfortunately I don't have the skills to develop such solutions.

Last edited by Sharc; 12th March 2020 at 21:06.
Sharc is offline   Reply With Quote