VideoProc Converter - is armed with function called auto copy (remux) which is able to help you with remuxing mkv to mp4. In the process of remux, no re-encoding occurs, which makes the whole process very fast. Remux functions taking the "contents" out from the mkv "container", then put it into another "container", let's say mp4. Take mkv for example, mkv is served as a kind of encapsulation format, you can imagine it as a "container". If you still have no idea about what it is, we will present you a more concrete example. Then the extraction is encapsulated into another format that we are familiar with. Remux means lossless extraction of video and audio data from a certain format. So, are there any feasible methods that may solve such problems? There are, certainly. It would be nicer to have everything in iTunes though.Many people may encounter a problem that when they are trying to convert a certain video into another format ( mkv to mp4, for example), the process may take too much time and the quality of the video converted may not be agreeable as expected. I then use an HTPC or a WDTV for playing back the MKVs. But I have remuxed my old HD-DVDs to MKV (keeping the original video encode and only converting the audio losslessly to multichannel-FLAC). Hence, for Blu-ray I keep using the physical discs. Then, as you mentioned, the lossless audio codecs used on BD are not supported either (in fact, the ATV unfortunately does not support any lossless multi-channel codec as far as I know )įor me personally, I have decided that the losses due to transcoding are just too big. In those cases just remuxing is not an option. Quite a few older and some new releases use the VC-1 video codec, which is not supported for playback by the ATV. a 7-ft projection screen is more revealing than a 45-inch TV).Īnother thing to keep in mind is that the codecs used on Blu-ray may not be compatible with the ATV. Of course, it also depends on the size of your display how visible encoding artifacts are (e.g. ![]() lots of film grain) are harder to encode, thus there is a higher risk of introducing additional encoding artifacts when you transcode. Movies with a high amount of entropy (e.g. The quality loss due to transcoding depends a lot on the source material. I wish it supported HD audio, as I now pass through the hd audio files when transcoding (future proofing them for now). Are there any cases where remuxing would make more sense than transcoding?Īs a side note, I do stream my collection from iTunes to a third gen Apple TV. I seem to be stuck between choosing a slightly smaller quality gain for almost 2x the size. I was wondering if anyone has any experiences with remuxing, or has any opinion on the subject (difference between it and transcoding). They looked very similar, but the Handbrake looked slightly more saturated. I tried a comparing a 40gb remuxed blu ray compared to a 20gb compressed handbrake file. I am wondering if I am missing out on quality by not remuxing the files using something like Subler, especially if I have the storage space (I have the power to transcode these movies, so that's not a concern). However, I am upgrading to a 48TB raid to store my collection (28 more than I currently need, leaving me quite a bit of room to expand by collection). I usually am able to get a pretty good quality conversion, with very little perceivable quality loss. ![]() I use the slow x264 preset as well as a constant quality of RF 18. ![]() For years now I have been converting my blu ray collection to MKV files (using MakeMKV) and then transcoding them to smaller mp4 files (using Handbrake).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |