H264 format would be the best?

bkemadu · January 26th, 2017, 06:02 AM

Im think about the big sized movies in movies section. They are mostly avi, mkv or wmv etc. Those kind of formats costs too much sizes. Thats why they would be convert into h264 format with h264 converter by internet size content option. A very small tool is very useful for it and its freeware.
Dont get me wrong but i am just giving a suggestion on movie file formats.

H264 would be the best format, what do you think?

**m100** · January 26th, 2017, 10:53 AM

**Jism Jim** · January 26th, 2017, 04:46 PM

H264 is not a format, it is a codec that can be used in container formats like WMV, MKV, MOV, AVI etc

It has been succeeded by H.265.

bkemadu · January 28th, 2017, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jism Jim

H264 is not a format, it is a codec that can be used in container formats like WMV, MKV, MOV, AVI etc

It has been succeeded by H.265.

Ah yes, i misunderstood. But maybe uploaders would be use this codec when they convert their videos.
So then the file size would be low and quality will be nearly same as mkv, wmv, avi and other mp4 formats.

Am I correct?

January 29th, 2017, 01:43 AM

Let me preface with saying I don't know shhh about the intricate parts behind a video file or what exactly codecs even mean or do. That said, when I rip DVDs I do indeed prefer to use MP4 with a h.264, and at the very least a 1500-2000kbps video bit rate. But, I do notice that for some reason AVI and WMV videos look...well I don't want to say "clearer" necessarily, but they do look more "polished". Ah, I can't explain it. It's at the uploaders discretion really, so I don't like bitching about it. But like I said, I do personally use it. But to be fair, almost everyone IS using MP4 h.264. AVI is a close second, and damn near almost no one is using WMV anymore (see those files ARE very big, but again, good quality). However! If you're using MPG in 2017, I do have to look at you sideways a little

**rlg118** · January 29th, 2017, 11:51 PM

1500-2000 kbps is OK for a small device, but for a laptop, double that or even triple it. (I routinely go to 6000, but I'm not putting files out there for download.) You'll see a big difference in clarity on a large screen.

January 30th, 2017, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlg118

1500-2000 kbps is OK for a small device, but for a laptop, double that or even triple it. (I routinely go to 6000, but I'm not putting files out there for download.) You'll see a big difference in clarity on a large screen.

6000 is a lot. Well, you know what the thing is though, if you are specializing in older material, there's really no real reason to be in any range higher than 4000 kbps (maybe 3500). Going that high does you no good because the actual DVD you're ripping (if it's say from 1997 or 2000) didn't have that high of a production anyway. I ripped a 2002 DVD for example that had an aspect ratio of 720x540 at 3800kbps by default, Ss ripping it at 6000 would do no good. These old DVDs and (and especially) VHS's, remember, were made for old school TVs like these

But, yeah, if you're talking about ripping the 1080p HD porn movies of today, 6000 is not even enough!

**m100** · January 31st, 2017, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkemadu

Ah yes, i misunderstood. But maybe uploaders would be use this codec when they convert their videos.
So then the file size would be low and quality will be nearly same as mkv, wmv, avi and other mp4 formats.

Am I correct?

please feel free to use whatever codecs etc you want when you upload your stuff.

**gordian_knot** · February 2nd, 2017, 09:51 PM

I have to convert everything to AVI (usually Xvid) because that's all my TV will play (except mpg). It's better for me to start with a better quality file. I'm afraid it falls on the downloader to convert into whatever format they need rather than ask uploaders to cater for them.

**CARLTON BROWN** · February 2nd, 2017, 11:39 PM

Just wanted to make a couple of comments on files and codecs. I have recently run into problems with MP4 H.265 files. They do not play back (for me) on anything aside from VLC on my computer. Yes, they are smaller in size and seem very crisp, but I cannot run them on my tablet, HD recorder, or main TV. Unfortunately, H.265 encoded files do not seem that good converted to another type.

The files I've been fairly happy to use, are MP4 H.264 L.4.1.

AVI seems to be a thing of the past, but its worth considering MKV as your main type of file, which are pretty reliable. I'd also suggest that if you have some decent video conversion software, you do not downsize the files as you will suffer quality loss.

Do a few tests with short files using different types and make comparisons.

January 26th, 2017, 06:02 AM	#1
bkemadu Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Far Away Posts: 176 Thanks: 691 Thanked 626 Times in 156 Posts	H264 format would be the best? Im think about the big sized movies in movies section. They are mostly avi, mkv or wmv etc. Those kind of formats costs too much sizes. Thats why they would be convert into h264 format with h264 converter by internet size content option. A very small tool is very useful for it and its freeware. Dont get me wrong but i am just giving a suggestion on movie file formats. H264 would be the best format, what do you think?

January 26th, 2017, 04:46 PM	#3
Jism Jim Sourcer of Smut Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,828 Thanks: 83,540 Thanked 341,575 Times in 8,421 Posts	H264 is not a format, it is a codec that can be used in container formats like WMV, MKV, MOV, AVI etc It has been succeeded by H.265. __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Feel free to post my scans to the relevant model threads, but do give credit

January 29th, 2017, 11:51 PM	#6
rlg118 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Land o' Lake-Effect Posts: 5,348 Thanks: 5,911 Thanked 113,435 Times in 5,360 Posts	1500-2000 kbps is OK for a small device, but for a laptop, double that or even triple it. (I routinely go to 6000, but I'm not putting files out there for download.) You'll see a big difference in clarity on a large screen. __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

February 2nd, 2017, 09:51 PM	#9
gordian_knot Vintage Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Gordium Posts: 1,225 Thanks: 6,524 Thanked 13,823 Times in 1,209 Posts	I have to convert everything to AVI (usually Xvid) because that's all my TV will play (except mpg). It's better for me to start with a better quality file. I'm afraid it falls on the downloader to convert into whatever format they need rather than ask uploaders to cater for them. __________________ - "The whole of anything is never told." - Henry James "Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable." - George Orwell

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

January 26th, 2017, 10:53 AM	#2
m100 Vintage Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 1,505 Thanks: 5,109 Thanked 11,919 Times in 1,489 Posts	no

January 29th, 2017, 01:43 AM	#5
31D1 Guest Posts: n/a	Let me preface with saying I don't know shhh about the intricate parts behind a video file or what exactly codecs even mean or do. That said, when I rip DVDs I do indeed prefer to use MP4 with a h.264, and at the very least a 1500-2000kbps video bit rate. But, I do notice that for some reason AVI and WMV videos look...well I don't want to say "clearer" necessarily, but they do look more "polished". Ah, I can't explain it. It's at the uploaders discretion really, so I don't like bitching about it. But like I said, I do personally use it. But to be fair, almost everyone IS using MP4 h.264. AVI is a close second, and damn near almost no one is using WMV anymore (see those files ARE very big, but again, good quality). However! If you're using MPG in 2017, I do have to look at you sideways a little

February 2nd, 2017, 11:39 PM	#10
CARLTON BROWN Grand Vizier Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Ruraltania Posts: 3,213 Thanks: 35,616 Thanked 35,570 Times in 3,205 Posts	Just wanted to make a couple of comments on files and codecs. I have recently run into problems with MP4 H.265 files. They do not play back (for me) on anything aside from VLC on my computer. Yes, they are smaller in size and seem very crisp, but I cannot run them on my tablet, HD recorder, or main TV. Unfortunately, H.265 encoded files do not seem that good converted to another type. The files I've been fairly happy to use, are MP4 H.264 L.4.1. AVI seems to be a thing of the past, but its worth considering MKV as your main type of file, which are pretty reliable. I'd also suggest that if you have some decent video conversion software, you do not downsize the files as you will suffer quality loss. Do a few tests with short files using different types and make comparisons.