Wetlook World Forum

Current time: Sat 11/05/24 19:57:59 GMT

Translate page FROM -> TO

Translate page TO <- FROM

Message # 78794.2

Subject: Are you sure about the bitrates you are quoting?

Date: Sun 20/10/19 18:53:56 GMT

Name: AnthonyX

Email: anthonyx@jowc.net

Website:

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help
with running costs: (you can change amount)

Those values of 320 and 128 kbps seem to me like audio bitrates, not video. I would agree that 320 kbps is unnecessarily high (192 kbps should be plenty), but this would represent only a tiny fraction of a file (or video stream). I believe HD video streams will be something like 20 Mbps, about 100x the values you are discussing; I believe a low-quality stream will be somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 Mbps.

In reply to Message (78794)

Question to producers - are video bitrates unnecessarily high?

By GSK - Sun 20/10/19 14:48:33 GMT

Website:

A technical question to producers:

Are the used bitrates of your downloadabe videos sometimes unnecessarily high? If it is not a trade secret, how you decide on the bitrates of your videos - bitrate based encoding or quality based encoding? Are you using higher bitrates just as a quality buffer, albeit many times unnecessary?

I am just asking because of limited space on my NAS I convert most of my files and I find that in Handbrake, when I set quality based re-encoding with Quicksync on, QA26 and 128 kbps AAC audio instead of the standard 320kbps used by some producers, I can achieve 30% to 50% smaller files without obvious loss of quality (judged on a 50 inch 4K TV set).

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs: (you can change amount)