4k remux vs encode. What is better between an encoded bluray 4k vs a web 4k .

4k remux vs encode “Remux” is derived from the words “remix” and “multiplex. They need to rewrite Plex's handling of 4k streams. Will you upgrade your set-up in the future? Storage is getting cheaper every year and technology also improves. - You will NOT have got a How would you rate the quality of Remux/Encodes vs original BR in %? From my testings there's no noticeable difference between the BR disc, the Remux and the Encode. I've been lurking in r/plex, r/hometheater, and r/homelab for a while, and I am looking for advice and resource recommendations on building a Plex setup that will give me 4k, HDR, super-saiyan, lossless or near-loss quality streams, possibly with the option to transcode down for remote users. But since anything that have HDR encode also have 4K UHD BD, so they will choose that over everything. I am running some tests to get a feel for size and quality of each, but I like to optimize things. Wish that 4k blurays were a standard for all movies but it is what it is. The sheet seems to prioritize quality of remuxes and encodes above all else; encoding to a lower file size with noticeable quality loss (however small) is kind of antithetical to the whole thing, which is QxR would My main question is it smarter to just take the blow and keep the large 4k remux files after ripping? Or encode them with say and nvidia card? Fortunately, I am flexible here. If 1080p remux's had HDR i would save space and not get the 4k version. 4k encode vs 1080p encode? I'd never get the smaller 4k unless the 1080p is stupidly large I guess but then it's just the same situation as a remux. h264 10-bit vs. 480p>720p>1080p>2160p(4k) Remux is an untouched BluRay. One 4K REMUX with heavy motion only compressed from 70GB to 52GB. Reload to refresh your session. The files score higher in PSNR, SSIM and VMAF metrics (they look better), they are 30% smaller in size and take around 40% less encoding time compared to having the exact same settings without any advanced options. That's because the codec is much more efficient. Follow this order: 1080p bluray > 4k web-dl > 4k bluray > 1080p web-dl. i could be wrong , what is your thought ? x265 is an encoded 4K BluRay. Though, depending on the source and encode type bit depth may be lost. Let Handbrake encode, with the resulting file being HDR10 recognized. With 1080p REMUX 25. It's a factor because the images are encoded with chroma subsampling; a compression technique for color information. :D remux has the highest Some torrented files are full 4K Bluray quality, others are compressed down. On the other hand, scene/p2p don't have any bandwidth constraints so they can focus only on quality. HDR in my opinion is a greater improvement to the movie than I did the comparison a few years back with the last terminator movie to see how a Yify encode looked next to the 4K Blu-ray Remux. Checking dark frames, and motion frames too and don't see a difference in detail. Media Info will show you. Obviously a bigger 4K screen can bring out the flaws in a In theory the 4k version should be higher quality, but my guess is they probably both suck. if you want smaller files, go to something like 22) Encoder Preset: Medium Encoder Tune: None Filesize: Remux = 1GB vs. However, some people don't have the luxury of space, whether digitally or physically to store remux media. Size will be comparable to an actual Blu-Ray remux. My plan is Remux movies only and great encodes for tv shows. From what I understand, even though Handbrake has 10bit options, it doesn't fully support HDR content and will lose that information (someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that). Question I recently bought a 4K TV and I have a question. Ps. You signed out in another tab or window. As for the HDR part, both use HDR (as you said) so your theather set-up must be able to handle it. A lot of movies aren't real 4k. The 1080p would also provide a better picture at 4K when upscaled. The original was H. I'd upgrade to the best x900(XT) CPU your board supports. The next big difference is Dolby Vision. Am I insane, for often (always?) preferring the 1080p REMUX to a 2160p / 4K Web-DL? There are more variables than that, such as encoding settings. The worst you may see is blocking in dark scenes. The good quality + lower space taken up is an attractive option. I do not know if this is right, but just wanted to know you guys's input on Yeah it's great, download a remux and a high quality encode and compare for yourself. (iGPU of the i3-12100) What took the longest was creating a 5. With the roku only having a 10/100 port, i Thanks for the reply. Depends if you want to have something for the long run or not. So it has lost quality, if you want to go for the best use the REMUX version. While a 1080 BD encode can average to be 1. The downside is the quality isn't as good as cpu encoding. Best part is I can use mkvtoolnix to take the lossless atmos or DTS:X track and add it to my 1080p br remux and set it as the new default. Plex CHOKES very often. Some blu ray players, such as the panny ub820 have fantastic hdr tone mapping. Handbrake does not Remux MKV or MP4. In general, if you encode anything, and want The biggest area I see quality problems is movies with lots of dark scenes as you really see the artifacts even with fairly good quality files. But movies I can tell a huge I'm no longer as concerned with the encoding times, so I'm looking for what settings are most important to preserve quality and lower file size. . I have been taking 4k remux, 4k encodes, 1080 remux and 1080 encodes and comparing quality by pixel peeping and watching and comparing while 6 feet away from the tv. 1 channel track along with 12 PGS subtitles. There's no such thing as what you see in movies that "enhance" pictures or movies that were already blurry. The 4k I’ve been encoding my UHD movie library to x265 on an i7-10700 w 64gb of ram, testing RF18 and RF20, fast, medium, and slow presets. Encoder tune grain for somewhat more efficient grain preservation. Private torrent sites will have them. h. REMUX 4K videos are still going to be like 40GB, so that's still only 200 movies on a drive? If I add a TV series thats going to take up so much of my Another thing is that it's a hard choice sometimes between web-dl with Dolby Vision and a regular 1080p remux. ts extension. I now have to choose between keeping files in 4K or converting to 1080p and then what quality profile to use. The size difference is one is AVC at low compression and the other is x265 at higher compression. The difference in filesize between them is insignificant relative to the total amount of storage needed for 200 UHD movies. So far I have been downloading REMUX releases of 4k movies, but I'm slowly running out of space on my drives, so I started researching about how much quality do I lose, by downloading compressed releases from SWTYBLZ and Terminal. That's not a remux, but is an encode. This may need the steps of demuxing and remuxing so that the re-encoding process works on video-only and audio-only streams, rather than trying to re-encode the contents of a multiplex directly. This makes software encode ideal for long term storage by converting all the raw footage and at the same time remove things like noise. 9/10 it will look better than it’s 1080p counterpart. So a remux playing on one device vs a disc playing in a different device. Framestor is a remux group so those would be pretty high file sizes, around 40-100 gb. I want to know if the difference between a remux file and a rip is that big or if I should go for the file with HDR 10+? A rip (especially that size) means it's probably A Scene Encode 2160p (with a smaller size) - Like with the same movie the Bluray REMUX is 91GB, but say a TIGOLE or NAHOM encode with a size of say 25-29 GB or maybe even 15-16GB or 16. If you decide to encode, make sure you are using proper settings: No copy+paste or default will archive your stuff properly. On smaller screens - 42” and less you may not notice the difference. If you are using other tools like Premiere Pro to encode the video due to some plugins I need, is there a way thru FFMpeg to add HDR10 metadata to the H. Which would still amount to ~550GB of space Web-DL has - Worse image quality than 4k Remux As for difference between nvenc and standard, while I did notice about a 1-2 stop difference on the quality meter - the difference in time to complete encoding and file size made it worth it to me. This is 7GB/Ep. a complete 1to1 ripped from a BluRay that hasn't been reencoded. 5mb/s and 4K WEB-DL 14. If an encode is done right, chances are slim you will notice a difference. That also depends if the 1080p remux has the same source as the 2160 encode, 1080p might be 4K HDR x265 vs 4K x264 . 265 encoded with a . WEB. I am not sure how well -NAHOM conforms to standard naming practices, as the Italians usually play things a bit looser. Whereas, encodes have minimal buffering. I always try and get the full remux if possible however this isn't an option for these, at least not at the moment. You just put it into a 320kbps box. I don’t see a difference in remux tv shows vs a good encode. I have to get really close to the TV and even then I can't find a justification 1080p is the resolution. But of course, the world is big and there are a lot of people. Remuxes all the way my friend. if it's been DNR'ed) which may follow through into the encoded file 2. Choose a movie which is native 4k. If you use any CRF above 12, then you obviously care about storage space and must accept detail loss. 4K + DV will be the best thing you can get for many, many years. 4k encodes look flat to me. I would compare apples to apples, ie a remux to a remux (or compressed to compressed). 7G . I ended up keeping the mkvcage because it was smaller, and I don't have much space. SOLUTION : [Blu-ray Ripping & Reading Metadata] Here's the Plex can deliver 4K Blu-ray Rips that are near native Blu-ray quality. I'm just wondering why encodes are labeled 1080p but they are actually 800p. Use the Multiplexer option of MKVToolNix to remux in the previously demuxed second video stream in to the new HDR10 file just transcoded. Step 1 is to not download the 4k light junk in your first example. When you go to make the compression from the original lossless file to an encoded compressed file, you choose your settings based on balancing three things: resulting file size, resulting file quality, and time to do the compression. Here's a video comparing the quality of hardware gpu encoding vs cpu. I understand that 4k files will be at least 4 x times larger than a 1080p equivalent (if we don't count the hdr data), but for instance my copy of blade runner in 4k is 50 times larger than my 1080p version and all I am doing is looking at optimizing this all. Inject the cropped rpu file with a new encoded cropped file. You signed in with another tab or window. People like me will choose Good HDR encode, which many will argue is better than SDR Remux, especially if it's filtered where needed with good encoding parameters. none of the 2160p HDR flicks are Remux much smaller file sizes compared to Remux most releases are WEB H265 For example, a 2160p. But when it comes to 4K, things (mainly storage) start to change your perspective. A remux is by definition not an encode and comparing different remux versions would, I believe, be a largely pointless exercise. - Tigole may be a bit smaller since they average around 7-22 gb per 4K movie but worth the shot. com to check. I watch on an OLED as well in a home theater setup. 3. Through troubleshooting, the issue appears to lie with this specific file. The second one has a 7. This is WAYYY too big for my little server (2-4TB right now). Good encodes (DON, SbR, etc) you will not notice the difference between the remux and the encode. i feel like HDR highlights and lighting should seamlessly blend with the rest of the picture but when the movie is encoded at a lower bitrate, the areas with HDR zones stick out unnaturally and feel like the only part of the movie with I rip/remux both the 4k disc and the 1080p disc, especially since not every movie has a superior 4k release imo and my projector only interpolates 1080p nor is it perfect at hdr. Remuxing is very different from encoding. Note that your resulting file may be smaller than the input file but will still look just as good. Cropped and encoded from the JP The YAS-207 Yamaha Soundbar does specify for the DTS output. Up until now, all I needed to do was wait for a 1080p Remux version of a movie, and if that would never come, I would get a 1080p AMZN release. 5M subscribers in the Piracy community. 7 mb/s the REMUX will have a much higher bits/pixel ratio and all things being equal would look better. 85gb plus audio. x264 and x265 are not codecs, they're libraries used to encode to a codec (h264 or h265). Remux it all together. Also, it would need to be from an untouched 4K remux to make it worth considering. 1 DTS surround sound track, but no indications of HDR support. Godzilla vs. Haven't compared the Between a remux and an encode, I'll always get the remux. say which source it is per the rules but recently I found the amazon web-dl of the show was far better than the bluray-remux. 4k is maybe 2x-3x. 0 channel track, deleting the 7. I have a rtx 3000 series gpu, a powerful cpu, gigabit internet and an Nvidia shield which is what I will be streaming the content from my plex server to. My entire library is 4k UHD and 1080p BR rips. The big difference is while both software and hardware quality can be good, the hardware encoders barely save much in file size while i can halve the file size in software encode. Ad for the REMUX or encode, it depends. FGT plagiarizes from other groups and adds unnecessary tracks. Discussion Hey all, I'm having a debate with a friend; Are 4k bluray remuxes of any less quality than the actual 4k disk? Like if the file has roughly 40gb++ depending on the movies length, is tagged with "REMUX" and is by a somewhat known or reputable ripgroup it should be an actual exact copy of the disc I can download GoT as 4K Blu Ray Remux (with lossless Atmos, which I really appreciate) with 25 GB/Ep on UHD movies. If storage space is a concern then you should probably skip remuxes and grab encodes. It will say either rc= crf (with the crf Honestly I've rarely seen a difference in a remux vs. Handbrake 1. those guys take forever and pay attention to the easy stuff like banding and artifacts looking for "transparent" encodes. Unfortunately I’ve had issues with the pro and miss the roku. MKV container Custom resolution 1920x1080 (1080p) CRF 18 Preset Very Slow x265 or x265 10 bit for 4K Audio leave uncompressed orginal Well first off, remux shouldn’t be in x264. I think 15,000kbps is a really high bitrate for a re-encode. I can HW encode any non-4K file without issue. 1080p rip vs. How does the quality compare to a 4k scene encode? Obviously WEB-DL won't approach the retail HEVC streams like you would find on a disc (or in an ISO/remux copy). A 4K lower bit rate encode is gaining you little, if anything, over a 1080p Blu-ray remux. If you want to keep Dolby Vision, make use of DDVT Tool to extract it from the remux and inject it into the encode. 265 may be able to handle the large file size by reducing the impact while maintaining visual quality but encoding is I think they're talking about chroma resolution, which is something that typically flies under the radar with most people. Assuming I go down the REMUX road, I've also read that a lot of movies' 4K releases aren't the 'real thing' because they haven't been made from actual 4k masters, and are just studio upscales from ~2K masters. Question about 4K WEB-DL vs 1080p Remux . Honestly I've rarely seen a difference in a 4k remux vs. Encoding lossy->lossy, will throw away Yeah if you download certain 4k remux it will be a file format (mkv) that the player will not be able to play for that I recommend using emby You can record something with a tinnny Nokia and encode it as 320kbps, but that doesn't mean it sounds like 320kbps. However, re-encoding offers greater control over the video and audio quality, allowing I am setting up a FileFlow to auto-encode remux video files to my own settings (removing black bars, foreign languages, ect. It varies by your eyes, your display, the content, the encode and what you tolerate. 4K rip downsampled to 1080p? 4KBRs will often have less compression artifacts which (depending on encoding settings) may follow through into the encoded file the 4KBR might have a different transfer which may be of higher quality or different character (e. 5MB/s Bitrate. Just not *re-*encoded by a third party. You just have to check the file size. 4k Bluray vs REMUX . Reply 4k Web-dl vs 4k scene encode . Video: Encoder: H. quality. At the ideal viewing distance it's hard to spot a difference between a remux and a good compressed one. See which gives the speed you're happy with, then find the RF you're happy with the size of (don't be afraid to go high! the mid to high 20s can be acceptable at 4K). I've been solving the 4K issue by avoiding 4K media until such a time comes in which we can remove the physical part of the legally acquired media. I could clearly tell the difference. If you have a solid tv and a great sounbar, you could use the REMUX. It is not encoded A remux is definitely encoded. It will likely be in h264 or h265 for the codec. The Blu-ray itself is already (almost always) a loss of quality from the original source recording, so I don't see the point in storing a 20 - 50 GB file when an 8 - 15 GB file will rival the quality at Minimal to no difference in almost all cases. That could mean a difference compared to a device steaming a remux. Reply reply More replies More replies. On a 65” 4K OLED at the viewing distance I sit at I can definitely tell the difference. I'd up the bframes to ≥8 in Handbrake's Advanced Options and maybe zone the credits too, especially if they're long, at For example, one good and cheap option is Beelink N100 mini PC. I was fortunate enough to get a free RTX 2080 founders edition from NVIDIA and with my current system that reduces the re-encode time per hour of video to about 5-6 minutes. ” It also requires more processing power and time compared to remuxing. Encode video with the same crop offset as the original untouched rpu file. If the 4k encode is less than, say, 50% larger than the 1080p encode then it'll depend on the movie - big budget sci-fi/fantasy then I'll probably grab the 4k but a romcom or something I'll just Meaning it can encode 4-6 seconds of video every second. Even your NVENC result is suspiciously slow. Both are processes in video editing, but both serve different functions. 265 encoder, however the filesize is consistent with a 4k remux. I didn't say that that, either. Assuming the encode is x264 thats very low bitrate for 4k. I have a 65 inch 1080p screen, There's little use in a downscaled 4K over native HD. The encode only seems to fail when I try to HW encode this 4k remux. With that said, a solid 1080p encode can be damn good and basically transparent, but I never know if a given encode will be, so I go with the remux. are from very reputable releasers, and are probably the best youll get without a massive size jump. I have decided that the quality difference is not worth the increase in space. Looks like you just want to This means that human subjects cannot tell the difference (or will not give a higher rating) to clips encoded at higher bitrates. 265 10 bit, H. Good encodes crop the video to remove the black bars which means they can properly be viewed using plex, etc. Question With some of these web-dls coming out at about 25 Mbps, we are approaching 1080p Bluray bitrates, albeit with a different codec. 265 10-Bit (x265) Framerate: Constant framerate, Same as Source Quality: Constant quality, 20 RF (there's room for preference. 2. I'm looking for the best quality settings to use for encoding via handbrake. Your second example with the low bitrate is also not a remux. However, the reason I am asking this question again on this sub, is because I am specifically interested in whether the difference would be Remux is the entire video file as it was encoded on the disk so there is no quality loss. I run 8000 bitrate myself on 4K remux, 5000 on 1080p Remux is irrelevant to your question. HDR or not, the video will play the same on an SDR display. I would go for the REMUX, maybe delete some after, or buy extra storage. It goes for around $200 and it’s a beast for 4K transcoding. Question Hi all, Finally upgraded to 4K tv and started the process of upgrading my library to 4K. At half the size too. If you have a 4K HDR TV like LG CX or C2 OLED, almost always get Blu-ray encodes due to how they handle the color space and actually Would the quality of a 4K Blu ray played through a Blu Ray Player connected to a Receiver be better than a 4k Remux file played on an Nvidia Shield The difference is less noticable at 4K 10mb/s, but will probably still have some compression in dark scenes whereas the 1080p 25mb/s would look much better in these conditions. I’ve used roku for years but went ahead and purchased a shield pro to handle 4K remux files. I mean that if I play a Remux, PotPlayer indicates the resolution as 1920x1080p and if I play an encode, the resolution is 1920x800p though they both have the black bars at the top. Even if the WEB-DL version has a lower bitrate, if it's encoded more efficiently, it will look If it's 4k, MA / amazon VOD then 4k framestor / wildcat remux, no 4k encodes for me. Another big thing I've noticed for encode vs remux is aspect ratios. We would like to show you a description here but the site won’t allow us. You switched accounts on another tab or window. 265 12 bit, and H. The file is the same but the device is different. 03 GB. A webdl is the entire video file as it was streamed via the website. Don't get me wrong, go with remux if you can or really want to. If you’re using a remux, both 1080p and 4K will be FAR better than what Netflix can deliver. I don't notice much of a difference between 25gb 4k compressed or remux copies. With tubes and 2017 pro, Kodi is always the fastest with heavy 4k streams. As the title says, I need help with uhd encodes on RARBG. Sea-Check-7209 Reply reply igmyeongui • I can't even see the difference from 4K remux and 1080p remux on a 65 inch sitting from my couch. I personally would always prefer a 1080p blu-ray remux over a 4k Rip. I have a 4K HEVC remux which I would like to scale down to 1080p, but without loosing any quality, yet be AVC rather than HEVC. Those sources would be called remuxs and they are 45-80gb for a 4K remux. I used to think 720p YIFY is bomb a couple of years back, but now I've got better internet and 720p YIFY is unwatchable, so I use 2160p Joy and 1080p QxR. In this case the x265 means the person reencoded the remux, lowering the quality, in order to make it h265 and lower the size. I tried H. Aug 6, It means they’ve taken the video and audio from a 4K Bluray disc and converted it to mkv format without any re-encoding. Any 1. Bluray could mean a lot of things perhaps a encode or maybe the full disk image you have to check the torrent files to be sure. Open the file in MediaInfo and compare the settings with that table. You’re Probabaly transcoding the video. You have two encoding cycles (digital master->remux->BRRip). 06 recognized file. No, 1080p scales cleanly into 4k so it should be fine. Debating between 4K Remux vs Encode as I'm in between upgrading some of my encode to remuxes and wondering if I should upgrade my entire collection or just some How do y'all decide which type to collect for what type of movies? I have a pretty good eye for detail, but I can't see a constantly noticeable difference between remux 4K and properly encoded 4K. At that bitrate a two hour clip will be 5. As alternative, I can download the Web-DL with DD+ Atmos. Most encodes online that I've seen specify the source type in the title and encoding formats in the information. Once the encode has finished, I transfer all the color data from the remux to the encode using Nmkoder's color data transfer utility - This includes HDR metadata. As for quality, I doubt you will see a difference even on a 4K screen. the HDR looks especially off. Hope this helps you. Hey guys, so I'm setting up my plex server and I've been looking at torrents for 4k movies and I'm wondering what would be best, I dont have tons of storage and I'm seeing remuxes that are a lot of GB obviously then I'm seeing some encodes that are in the 20gb range but I've heard about 'tigole' being for me plex streaming for 4K remuxes is so inconsistent even on direct play. A streaming service is trying to optimize bandwidth usage and overall customer satisfaction w/ quality. on the other hand, the smaller 265/264 files appear to be smoothing The i5 12600K has the excellent UHD770 QSV chip allowing for ~8-10 simultaneous 4K remux h265 dec to h264 enc @ 5-15Mbit/sec with tone mapping. To be honest, I don’t see very much difference between them, even on a 110″ screen. Joined Aug 6, 2018 Messages 3 Reaction score 0 Points 28 Age 38 Location Canada. The file size of compressed versions from a lot of the scene releases are obscenely large and absolutely unwarranted. But ofc there is use cases for encodes, too: mobile devices, limited space because you're only just starting out, etc. So all of that goes into my archive and will be seeded til kingdom come (or 8K or whatever). As an example - It will allow ~8-10 x 4K remux transcodes (to 1080p) vs only 1-2 on the UHD630. But it's still worth downloading the 4k version for the HDR. You have an SDR display so just ignore HDR. g. Hi, im thinking of upgrading some of my downloaded movies to 4k and im wondering if i should go for the remux versions or the encoded versions? im seeing remux versions at 50-70GB and other options there for 15-25GB and i dont want to be able to notice a dip in quality and the hdr being off especially if im upgrading to 4k for the better quality and hdr. The first 4 ‘rules’ generally are no longer as important as they once were, but may still be a good thing to bear in mind. When comparing sizes the Ultra HD Blu-ray supports 4K UHD (3840 × 2160 resolution) video at frame rates up to 60 frames per second, encoded using High Efficiency Video Coding. is there a huge difference Indeed, on my current 55" 4k Samsung TV, I can't see a difference at ~7ft, so I just go for the encodes. You can take a long time to make a small file that is pretty much Non-DV H265 is encoded ~12MB/s for video DV Encodes are ~24 MB/s With the increase bitrate, quality should be better maintained within. Even on my 42 inch tv, I couldn't tell them apart. With an encode, you will virtually always see a long list of Encode settings, example - cabac=1 / ref=3 / deblock=1:0:0 / analyse=0x3:0x113 / me=umh / subme=9 etc. From @VirulentPip hw encoding is very fast I tried encoding some 4K HDR files using Handbrake and they look washed out. The high quality 4k bluray encode is about Decomb will revert the encode to 8-bit, so you should probably just turn it off. I always thought encodes are compressed versions of the remux, but I have been reading that 4K encodes are not noticeable from 4K remuxes. An encoder wrote this in their nfo for a 1080p encode for a recent movie, comparing the blu ray with a 4k WEB-DL: The film has a lot of dark scenes, 4k web source has better PQ, especially in dark and flat areas, and less bandings and blockings, and also there are more details in 4k web source, and bd is vague in many details and scenes, so I chose and encode from web source. Hedorah (1971) 4K UHD Encode + Eng Subs by Toho Co. Reply reply [deleted] • Hmm, ok I’ll try to cut out a 5-10 minute slice of a UHD REMUX and encode that down and post the logs later tonight. I use average bitrate setting because I can never get constant quality at the right file size, and my settings are around 6,500 for 4k content. Correct. Most remuxes i've watched keep these black bars and therfore the screen isnt being A remux is a direct extract from the source. Dolby Vision, is an A blu-ray remux will always be higher quality than anything re-encoded. H265 is 18. 00 GB per episode a remux can be anywhere from 4. 265 file without re-encoding? I would say in general I'd trust scene/p2p to make higher quality encoding choices than a streaming service. Proper Encode = ~450MB If you need to save some space you should encode. I have heard Encodes aren't always bad, this was just a bad encode. Most 4K is upscaled (especially when cgi heavy) from the source anyway so its really the hdr that adds the deep color and contrast to make the pq look far superior to the sdr when done right. I would like to build a server with ~50 TB of RAID storage to handle this with whatever BDRip - Encoded from the remux. BRRip - Means it has been re-encoded from an existing bluray encode, which results in further quality loss Best 4k encodes vs remux for my setup . I used to reencode my blue rays now I leave them as remux and my 4k I always try to keep remux NOTE: for 2022 – Plex has come a long way since this FAQ was originally written, HW transcoding has become more available and more stable, and tone mapping was recently added to address the hdr/sdr color conversion issues. 264 10 bit, and they all ended up looking washed out compared to the original file. I just went from a 1080 priojector to a sony 4k 65 inch tv. The second pert is the code used to compress the video. I was wondering, is there much of a difference between let's say a 70gb remux compared to something like a decent 20-30gb encoded bluray rip? What is better between an encoded bluray 4k vs a web 4k The difference between REMUX that is 85Gb and 3 GB encode is the bitrate. FFmpeg is the leading multimedia framework, able to decode, encode, transcode, mux, demux, stream, filter and play pretty much anything that humans and machines have created. - You WILL want to create a 'very good' 1080p encode. As far as 4K remuxes go, whether it was shot in 2K and upscaled to 4K or if it was shot 4K completely, you’ll benefit greatly by HDR. The Yify version has less fine details and you could see clear Use the 10 bit encoder. I usually pick two dark frames, two light frames, two high action frames and two stationary frames and compare the result with an unencoded frame. Read more about Plex 4K transcoding here, and here you will find good Plex Server examples with prices. What is looked down upon, as severely degrading the quality, are encodes that use the BRRip as a source because then you have three cycles of lossy encoding (digital master->remux->BRRip>new encode) Lastly, there is no such thing as "optimally compressed". I acknowledge that others want the best of the best but I've had zero issues with what I'm watching. The good news about adding/changing audio is it is very light vs re-encoding video - a few mins tops per film for TRUE-HD to AC3 for example - and in the case of the AC3 track already being there I'm trying to encode a 4k HDR remux to AV1 via HW, but my attempts to encode fail. 1080p remux vs 2160p blu ray . They do take up to 24 hours to encode on my 4690k though Reply reply The debate between a 4K scan directors cut on Blu-ray VS a DCP 2k scan theatrical cut is one that I have yet to come to a decision on. 4KBRs will often have less compression artifacts which (depending on encoding settings) may follow through into the encoded file the 4KBR might have a different transfer which may be of higher quality or different character (e. In the case I ONLY have the 'x265 4K web-DL' option. I start with either ripping my own or hand picking a source from an already ripped remux, then encode at a bitrate just above where I see a noticeable difference for the same set of frames. HDR. It is not reencoded compared to the bluray, its the same thing but as an mkv. MP3), then you'll be discarding data as part of the encoding process. Download encode and remux and find out if you can tell the difference. 5 fps and qsv 70 fps. 264 encoding guide is very helpful. (Such as TERMiNAL releases) The only difference would be if author left out audio tracks and subtitles from the remux. REMUX: A rip of Blu-ray or HD DVD disk to another container format or just stripping the disc of menus and bonus material while keeping the contents of its audio and video streams intact, guaranteeing the exact 1:1 movie quality as on original disk. I have studied the results vs the source files in-depth, and I cannot find Unless the source has some problems like dirty pixels and banding, and the encoder fixes them, the remux is always best. Another approach is desktop PC and NVidia GPU. I'm trained to see the difference between 4K and HD for my job, you can clearly see better resolution plus the difference between SDR and HDR. Ordinarily the x265 tag is reserved encodes, as x265 is the name of the H. They will either be in AVC or VC- 1 codecs which is what Blu-ray was originally encoded with. These are the settings that seem most important (as far as I know): AV1 vs. I've read some people say that they're still worth it because of the added HDR support in most of these cases, but Pastebin your encoding log, <1 fps seems low even for 4K x265 on a 2600. Using this, I end up a DV 07. For me its because of his encode quality vs the size. I REMUX vs Encoded BluRay? Question So I'm getting an OLED soon and it's given me an excuse to catch up on some movies I've been meaning to watch. 39 GB, while the same movie in 2160p. ⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements. The reason why I’ve put 4k web-dl before 4k bluray is that 4k web-dl has more than enough bandwidth for a 1080p display so 4k bluray will be overkill. Reason being, if a 4K equivalent source for a particular movie exists, whether that's film or digital, then the existing 1080p versions (blu ray, digital whatever) have already been created from that higher resolution source. this is just my personal opinions. I think hdr is the key to quality and makes even an encode worth watching over a 1080p remux. resolution or codec type) such that it needs to be uncompressed and recompressed. they're just upscaled (you can go on blu-ray . Though if you plan to upgrade to a 4K set one day, you can go with the 2160p file. Happy to be corrected here but if you’re looking for remuxes for ultimate archival quality then you should find these unedited copies are identical, irrespective of who the release group is. The only difference was different patterns of grain on the borders of object. And since the space tradeoff is often between ~~55GN TrueHD and DTS-HD audio are unmatched. A x264 encode for this movie would be fine at 3GB. But apples to apples, it would then depend on how you watch the Best 4K REMUX Release Groups? See the recent Love Actually 2160p REMUX release from FraMeSToR vs CiNEPHiLES as an example. 5GB to 7 GB per episode. Thread starter james007; Start date Aug 6, 2018; Tags 4k blu ray uhd james007 Novice Member. It shouldn't make a difference which app you use as it's all using the same decoding chips. If its x265 and the 1080p encode is x264 then maybe consider the 4k but thats still pretty low. Whether or not you’ll be able to tell a difference depends on the quality of your setup. I tend to keep this as a separate copy, so I end up with an HDR10 and DV versions. The i5 12600K has the excellent UHD770 QSV chip allowing for ~8-10 simultaneous 4K remux h265 dec to h264 enc @ 5-15Mbit/sec with tone mapping. If you have a Roku TV and your streaming from a Plex app don't bother with 4K remux Dithered down web rips = cheap TV, sound bar setup Common setup but not meant i did some testing with 4k clips (raw quality) encoded to arc a380 qsv av1 and 4090 nvenc av1 vs hevc for both qsv and nvenc -- the average fps speed for av1 at best quality preset for both: nvenc 61. If the 4k encode is less than, say, 50% larger than the 1080p encode then it'll depend on the movie - big budget sci-fi/fantasy then I'll probably grab the 4k but a romcom or something I'll just File size does correlate with heavy motion sequences; it appears that's where the file size saving is the least. Or least it wasn't at first. None. If you change Media Info's view from Tree to Text, scroll sideways along the Encode Settings list, and you will eventually see the method of encoding. These movies are typically around 40-60gb, or even larger depending on the movie. IIRC, they were just 2-pass slow settings, aq-mode was changed to 3, I think. And you probably won't be able to tell the difference between the Remux and a 4k reencode if you're needing to ask about it. Maybe if I did stills but who knows. A good encode half the size of the remux is usually hard to tell the difference. Ltd. I guess the BEST source in my use case will be the Remux for obvious reasons. And I cannot detect a difference either on my LG 77" CX OLED or 140" JVC 4K projector (or my 4K computer display for that matter) even when standing up close to the screen swapping back and forth really quick between the Remux and encode and pixel peeping. I can SW encode this 4K file without issue. ). One thing to consider would be that 4K is usually "encoded" in 10 bit colour range meaning it can have 4x the colour range of 8 bit, 256 colours vs 1024 colours. For example I watched thor ragnarok from a lossless remux vs his encode (just testing) on a 55 4k tv and honestly at where i was setting i couldn't notice a difference. I always prefer REMUXES over any encode, anyday. Hate to muddy the waters but most 1080p files use the old h264 encoding, whereas most 4k files use the If its a 4k remux, its in h265. h265 (10 Some people just don't have the resources to watch 4k in gull Remux quality. MKV and MP4 are just containers. So they will choose 1080p SDR Remux over HDR encode. nvenc av1 and qsv av1 have very similar vmaf scores at various bitrates on best presets. GPU's have encoders that are designed specifically to do decoding and encoding fast at the expense of quality and compression efficiency. But the quality has been improving on newer generations of gpus since the feature was first available. If you wish to go down the AV1 route - then the discreet Intel A series cards will allow this for lowish $ - not yet fully supported in software (see threads in this forum) but no doubt will be shortly. 1 channel and a 2. SWTYBLZ i’ve had decent luck with, pretty good quality for a 4K encode. One thing to note is that these are Webrips and not remuxes of the actual disc. My thinking is that this potentially would be better than even a well encoded UHD copy, since Itunes likely compressed it from an uncompressed copy, while the UHD Bluray is already compressed, and then someone compressed it again. It's very easy to use! Depends on the source of the Web-DL and the encode. I recommend you vary the CRF until you find the value where you cannot perceive a difference anymore between the original and the re-encoded one. AVC(x264) is less efficient than HEVC(x265) by roughly half. Also keep in mind that sometimes files have to be encoded a certain way depending on the device you're playing back on (For example, playing back an mkv directly on an LG OLED requires DTS audio and Dolby Vision video to be remuxed to play correctly) What's everyone's preference for content where a 4K REMUX isn't available because it was never released for that particular item. 4. The biggest difference would be seen between webdl and the remux as the webdl almost certainly doesn't have enough bitrate. Why are the HDR movies much smaller than Remux? Is there a loss of A/V quality? Edit: running a 70GB 4K Remux HDR 7. It seems the easiest versus something like Megui. Unless it's 4K Material you probably have enough storage. 1080p remux could be anywhere from 15gb-40gb. I'd go for the large encode. REMUX is definitely something for the long run. Based on your answer I understand that in Remux the letterboxes are native We would like to show you a description here but the site won’t allow us. The H. a high quality encode. they lose the sense of depth that a full remux has. Generally, using a GPU to handle conversions of permanent files is frowned upon. h264 vs. . You want to use CPU for the best results. 4K UHD vs BLU RAY REMUX. 5- 2. You should end up with 3000-6000 kbps for 4K which is way lower than HEVC would go, with equal or Hopefully others can offer suggestions, but I've yet to see a 1080p encode (of a 4K Blu-ray), that looked as balanced, colorwise, as those from a 1080p Blu-ray source. Encoder preset veryfast or slow are the only two that make much sense. Any time you re-encode a blu-ray, (which is what a Rip is) you will get some amount of compression artifacts and light banding. But even if you are viewing on a top notch tv, a remux and a large encode would have no difference visually. Assuming for a second that I am an acceptable good encoder would it be the final encode, JUST in terms of quality (CPUtime is NOT relevant), much distant from the Remux-generated one ??? Thank you very much. Godzilla vs Kong: 4K HDR Blu Ray remux 43,6 GB vs 4K HDR 10+ BluRay rip 5,39 GB? Question I have a Samsung QN90A Neo Qled 55 Inch and can only display HDR 10 and HDR 10+. How many 4K REMUX movies will you be able to take? To answer the question, a 4K REMUX will generally be around 50+ GB. With the release of Captain Marvel, there is a good quality 4k iTunes DL available. The discs support both 4k remux vs x265 encode bitrate question . Next time only download one. So I usually use Handbrake to encode all of my videos, but things have changed now that I've started collecting 4k movies. BluRay - Vague terminology, can be used for either a full bluray, remux or encoded release. Remuxing is the process of moving the content of a video from one container to another, which will The remuxes have extreme noise that’s really distracting and actually discards some of the depth information of the scene. it is as good of quality as the source contained. if it's been DNR'ed) which may ReEncoding is changing some aspect of the format (eg. At the very least doubling in size. 1 copy of The Batman through the stack took 24 min on 1 GPU worker. Publication date 1971-07-24 Topics Godzilla, Hedorah, Kaiju, Toho, Yoshimitsu Banno Language Japanese Item Size 19. Here is what I'm thinking will yield really good quality on my 1080p and 4K encodes. Remux movie is 49. you're asking what the difference between euros and eggs is. use that. It will read as 320kbps, but it won't sound after a lot of tinkering I've found that having some extra parameters are worth it. I do notice the quality difference between a remux and a good encode - hence I still opt for remuxes. rfdffl kwffw xqiiu ornqol pfpvu rzn zrspju imociv naejma nlndaw