[x265] Who washed my video? x264 vs x265 'placebo' comparison

[Niccolò Belli]

In data domenica 23 febbraio 2014 14:22:01, Tom Vaughan ha scritto:
> Does the MKV contain video that was ripped straight from the Blu-ray 
> Disc?
> The video in the MKV is only 14 Mbps... I would have expected a 
> higher bit
> rate (and more detail) if this was not re-encoded.  It would be best 
> to
> start with the highest quality source possible.

No, unfortunately it isn't ripped directly from a Blu-ray and that's 
why I chosed such a small target size. I just bought "The Hobbit: An 
Unexpected Journey" which is considered one of the best quality sources 
available, so next time I will rip directly from Blu Ray and I will 
choose an higher target bitrate.

> Notice that prova.h264 is twice the size (12 MB) of prova.h265 (6 
> MB).  This
> explains some of the difference in quality.  It's hard to hit a bit 
> rate
> target with such a short clip.

The files *do* have the same bitrate, but it seems I had some prolems 
while uploading them. I uploaded them once again, prova.h264 is 46094455 
bytes (45MB) while prova.h265 is 46238768. To be fair the smallest one 
is the one encoded with x264 ;)

> To be fair, we want to compare encoded frames to the original 
> incoming
> frames.

Ok, I modified my php script to take care of it. Now you can compare 
both x265 vs x264 and x265 vs source :)

http://files.linuxsystems.it/functions/comparison.php?test=test1&codec1=x264&codec2=x265&number=1
http://files.linuxsystems.it/functions/comparison.php?test=test1&codec1=source&codec2=x265&number=1

Please note that the original source screenshots are still uploading 
right now, so you will have to wait some minutes before you can see all 
of them.

> Thanks!
> Tom

You too.

Niccolò