MakeMKV + Handbrake = 10GB files...need smaller

[MrMacMini]

I've been reading lots of posts and have finally mastered the Bluray ripping process using MakeMKV.

Here's my issue/question:
After ripping with MakeMKV I end up with a file about 24GB. Then I convert to .mp4 using Handbrake (using the ATV3 preset) and usually end up with a ~9GB file. This is eating up space quickly. Can someone help me get something more manageable like a 4GB file without losing to much quality?

Thanks for the help. (sorry for the stupid question).

 

[alangrehan]

I have the same problem...

My Blurays rip at around 20GB and the smallest file I have gotten using the ATV3 preset has been about 8GB....

Try adjusting the slider... RF 0 is uncompressed (and actually produces a file much bigger than the original) and 50 is highly compressed with big loss of quality.

If you look at the handbrake forums they recommended 22+/-1 for bluray rips. You should play around with it. But I've found the slider is not linear and the amount of compression and you have to sample it to get what you want.

https://trac.handbrake.fr/wiki/ConstantQuality

 

[Aidoneus]

I've been reading lots of posts and have finally mastered the Bluray ripping process using MakeMKV.

Here's my issue/question:
After ripping with MakeMKV I end up with a file about 24GB. Then I convert to .mp4 using Handbrake (using the ATV3 preset) and usually end up with a ~9GB file. This is eating up space quickly. Can someone help me get something more manageable like a 4GB file without losing to much quality?

Thanks for the help. (sorry for the stupid question).

Use the Apple TV 2 preset. You will end up with a 720p file, but it will look better than a 1080p file that has been compressed into <4GB.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Buy a 2TB external hard drive for about $100. 2000GB/9GB = approx. 222 BD conversions. If you have more BDs than that, buy 3TB (for about 333 BDs) or 4TB (for about 444BDs).

Otherwise, it seems you have colliding goals: you are ripping BDs presumably for much higher quality vs. DVD but you don't want the bigger files sizes that come with higher quality.

If you can't/won't spend for the extra storage space, the advice above pretty much hits it. You'll either trade off fine detail by moving the slider up from defaults or trade off resolution by going from 1080p to 720p. There is no magic solution that will retain BD quality at 1080p but cut file sizes by another 50% or more.

If quality is more important to you, spend the $100+ for big storage. If economics are more important to you, follow the advice offered above.

 

[alangrehan]

Buy a 2TB external hard drive for about $100. 2000GB/9GB = approx. 222 BD conversions. If you have more BDs than that, buy 3TB (for about 333 BDs) or 4TB (for about 444BDs).

I'm in this camp... I'm happy with the big file sizes but my iTunes library is approaching 3TB and I've been letting itunes manage the library.

Is it possible to split the itunes library accross multiple hard drives (2 x 2TB or 3 x 2TB) and still let itunes manage the library?

 

[Diode]

If you are ripping at 1080P that's a normal file size. Some of my 720P movies approach 7GB....

 

[mic j]

At the risk of starting an argument...Does anyone consider the option of not saving everything? Do you really need to keep 350 BD's? Or is it "Look at the size of my collection" syndrome?

For instance: I have decided to limit myself to 2TB. That includes storage of backup mkv's and of course the mp4 from those mkv's. As I near filling the drive, I go back and ask myself...Do I really need "Click" or "Dumb and Dumber"? If I do...do I need both the mkv & mp4 or will just the mp4 be ok? Also, when acquiring new material, I decide on whether I really need the BD or will a dvd be acceptable. Let's face it, some movies just don't need 1080p to be very acceptable (and let's not forget that tv's do a pretty good job of upscaling to near 1080p quality). Eventually, I will fill that drive. But I can really slow the process down by being selective about what I save and not be sucked in to the hoarder syndrome. In the meantime, drive prices will drop.

Just offering this as something to think about.

 

[GermanyChris]

Time to buy some drives...

Welcome to the wonderful world of ripping movies

 

[98EXL]

This is probably completely useless but I'm in the exact other boat.

My DVD rips are on average 1.5GBs, and I can't wait to actually have some ~10GB BD rips. I am doing Band of Brothers right now (because it's been awhile) and SW is next. I'm going to have a storage problem by years end. I'm not looking forward to that, but I'm hoping 3/4TB drives keep coming down in price.

 

[alangrehan]

At the risk of starting an argument...Does anyone consider the option of not saving everything? Do you really need to keep 350 BD's? Or is it "Look at the size of my collection" syndrome?

I'm a hoarder... Physically and digitally!

My wife would give all my old dvd's to

http://www.musicmagpie.co.uk/

but I've persuaded her to hold off until they've been ripped first. You just never know when you might want to watch an old film. I have a huge CD collection which I won't part with either... even though I recently realised the only CD player in the house is in the iMac!

 

[98EXL]

At the risk of starting an argument...Does anyone consider the option of not saving everything? Do you really need to keep 350 BD's? Or is it "Look at the size of my collection" syndrome?

Not for us. You know what triggered it? How crappy On Demand is. Video quality is sometimes flaky, and searching through all of our premium channels movie listings is a pain. The UI of the ATV is sweet, and SWMBO loves to spend her free time being lazy and watching movies, so it's win win

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Is it possible to split the itunes library accross multiple hard drives (2 x 2TB or 3 x 2TB) and still let itunes manage the library?

Yes, and pretty easy. Itunes, Preferences, Advanced, "Copy files to iTunes Media Folder when adding to Library". Uncheck that last one and you can store your files on any number of hard drives, network attached storage, etc. What it's doing when checked is copying from wherever a file is stored to a central location (usually your boot drive) when you add it to iTunes. Unchecking it just leaves the file where it is and has iTunes pointing to it.

The key issue with this is that you have to think a bit more should you ever want to move files around (that can get iTunes confused until you show it the new location of the file).

Generally, I just toggle this on and off depending on the media being imported. For example, if I'm importing a new CD, I toggle it on so the import copies the small music files to the main drive. For movies & TV shows, I toggle it off and store them on an external RAID-5 box. iTunes manages all of it as if it is on a single drive but one could have many drives working like this... well beyond what any internal drive could hold.

 

[mic j]

I'm a hoarder... Physically and digitally!
You just never know when you might want to watch an old film.

I think I have heard that rationalization from people whose homes are stuffed with newspapers from the 1940's! Maybe I should offer on-line counseling for digital "hoarders"...might be a business opportunity here!!!

I must admit that I still have all my cd's. And I still accumulate music through download. But I put that on random, so there is always some chance that I will hear that old music. Maybe there should be a shuffle function for movies?

Oh, well, doesn't appear that I am convincing anyone.

 

[MrMacMini]

Buy a 2TB external hard drive for about $100. 2000GB/9GB = approx. 222 BD conversions. If you have more BDs than that, buy 3TB (for about 333 BDs) or 4TB (for about 444BDs).

Otherwise, it seems you have colliding goals: you are ripping BDs presumably for much higher quality vs. DVD but you don't want the bigger files sizes that come with higher quality.

If you can't/won't spend for the extra storage space, the advice above pretty much hits it. You'll either trade off fine detail by moving the slider up from defaults or trade off resolution by going from 1080p to 720p. There is no magic solution that will retain BD quality at 1080p but cut file sizes by another 50% or more.

If quality is more important to you, spend the $100+ for big storage. If economics are more important to you, follow the advice offered above.

Looks like thats going to be my next step. I just found a 3TB for $150 which Ill use strictly for movies and music. Quality is more important to me.

 

[utazdevl]

I am actually having a very similar issue (HD files between 7-10GB) and finally came to the realization that the purpose of my HD encodes is quality (as opposed to my SD library, where the purpose is mobility), and have learned to accept the files for their large size and accept that having a vast HD encode collection is going to take up a lot of storage space.

Where I run into oddness is the variance in the sizing of my HD encodes. With my SD encodes, I set the bit rate at about 1200 and get a 2 hour film right about an even 1GB across the board. with the HD encodes, I have some 2 hours films coming in at 9GB and some coming in around 6GB. There doesn't seem to be as much consistency.

Anyone else have that issue?

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Yes, but there's an easy way to think about it. A fixed bit rate encode is only one factor in what is going to be the ultimate file size. For example, if you shot a plain color background for- say 1 hour- and then sat yourself on a merry-go-round, aimed the camera out- and shot video for 1 hour of a continuously rotating and entirely changing background, the ultimate file size differences would be HUGE. Simpler, static content will compress much more tightly than complex, dynamically-changing content. That you are setting a fixed bit rate is only one piece of the puzzle; the encode must still try to log all of what is changing in the picture so that playback looks like what was shot. The plain background log is pretty easy to store in a very small file as nothing changes pixel to pixel. The merry-go-round shot have every pixel in the picture changing every second. Your bit rate will remain the same for both but the model of trying to be able to reproduce the changes in pixels will cause a huge difference in the final file output size.

When compressing DVD, you are capturing 720 x 480i (or so) video. When compressing BD, you are capturing 1920 x 1080p video. The range of detail differences in those frame sizes is HUGE, which is what makes BD look so much sharper than DVD on a good screen. If you scaled down the BD render to DVD resolution, the variances of file sizes would shrink down to DVD-like rips. Similarly, if you shrunk the output of DVD rips to VCR levels of resolution, files sizes would get smaller and the range of file sizes film to film would get even tighter.

Now mix & match those. When capturing 720 x 480i with varying levels of on-screen activity, the output is naturally going to come in at file sizes that can only vary so much. Up it to 1920 x 1080p with varying level of on-screen activity and you have much more detail to try to compress into a file. Thus, file size variances are going to be wider... sometimes much wider depending on how many pixels are changing frame to frame in the video itself.

If we ever get 4K medium in some form, the file size range from movie-to-movie is going to be even that much greater because there will be so much more detail to store. The merry-go-round video experiment would be insane relative to the tiny file size of the static background.

 

[BJMRamage]

Yes, and pretty easy. Itunes, Preferences, Advanced, "Copy files to iTunes Media Folder when adding to Library". Uncheck that last one and you can store your files on any number of hard drives, network attached storage, etc.

so, how easy is it to move already imported files to a new drive?

I know where they are located...I had to delete several of my home movies trying to nail down the right export from iMovie.

Anyway, would it be as simple as a move and when it asks for new location I direct it or do I delete the files in iTunes and move and then import again? seems as though it would take a while for iTunes to import...unless the first time it was really just moving the file from one location to another (when I handbrake'd a movie).


Thanks in advance.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

If you've got them tagged by an external tagging editor like MetaZ, MetaX, etc, its very easy. Just delete them from iTunes, move the files to where you want to store them, uncheck that box referenced earlier in iTunes preferences, then drag them back into iTunes. It will reindex them just like importing any new media and you're good to go.

If you tagged them with iTunes, you may lose some metadata associated with them, meaning you may need to retag some of the details about them.

If I was you and I was uncertain about how they were tagged, I would read them all into MetaZ, MetaX, etc- whatever you might use for tagging- and then re-export them. This will put the metadata in the file rather than potentially having some of it stored in iTunes. Then, you can move the files wherever and their data is moving with them.

If you are pretty confident but not certain, try a block at a time. For example, if you have 100 videos to move, try 10 or 20 at a time. After you pull them back into iTunes, quickly check them to be sure they have their posters, data, etc. If so, try another 10 or 20. If not, consider the external tagging step I reference up above.

If you are certain you tagged them all externally, you could delete them all, move them, uncheck the preferences box, drag them back into iTunes, let it reindex them and it should be as good as how they are stored now.

I think there are some scripts for moving them manually, but the delete, move, reimport model has worked very well for me (I know for certain all of my tagging was done outside of iTunes).

 

[BJMRamage]

About 99% sure all the regular movies were tagged outside of iTunes.

But, I actually went in and tagged all my Home Movies and added artwork, etc. (yeah weirdo that I am, but as a graphic designer, I already had a cover for the DVD I made)

and those files seemed to take a while to import and tag within iTunes (decided to output at 1080) and it crashed iTunes a few times.
I will have to look out for Meta X or MetaZ or whatever it is.

Currently for ripped movies I run through Subler as an easy way to add things.

 

[utazdevl]

Yes, but there's an easy way to think about it. A fixed bit rate encode is only one factor in what is going to be the ultimate file size. For example, if you shot a plain color background for- say 1 hour- and then sat yourself on a merry-go-round, aimed the camera out- and shot video for 1 hour of a continuously rotating and entirely changing background, the ultimate file size differences would be HUGE. Simpler, static content will compress much more tightly than complex, dynamically-changing content. That you are setting a fixed bit rate is only one piece of the puzzle; the encode must still try to log all of what is changing in the picture so that playback looks like what was shot. The plain background log is pretty easy to store in a very small file as nothing changes pixel to pixel. The merry-go-round shot have every pixel in the picture changing every second. Your bit rate will remain the same for both but the model of trying to be able to reproduce the changes in pixels will cause a huge difference in the final file output size.

When compressing DVD, you are capturing 720 x 480i (or so) video. When compressing BD, you are capturing 1920 x 1080p video. The range of detail differences in those frame sizes is HUGE, which is what makes BD look so much sharper than DVD on a good screen. If you scaled down the BD render to DVD resolution, the variances of file sizes would shrink down to DVD-like rips. Similarly, if you shrunk the output of DVD rips to VCR levels of resolution, files sizes would get smaller and the range of file sizes film to film would get even tighter.

Now mix & match those. When capturing 720 x 480i with varying levels of on-screen activity, the output is naturally going to come in at file sizes that can only vary so much. Up it to 1920 x 1080p with varying level of on-screen activity and you have much more detail to try to compress into a file. Thus, file size variances are going to be wider... sometimes much wider depending on how many pixels are changing frame to frame in the video itself.

If we ever get 4K medium in some form, the file size range from movie-to-movie is going to be even that much greater because there will be so much more detail to store. The merry-go-round video experiment would be insane relative to the tiny file size of the static background.

Thank you for this explanation. I had a feeling it had to do with the content, but couldn't really resolve in my mind how Handbrake valued content. My thinking was it was all just bits and bites to the program. I understand much better now.

 

[Cobra611]

I began using ATV2 then ATV3 Presets,and was unhappy with the encoding time and file size. My times were nothing less than 11 hrs with most being anywhere from 15-18 hrs, with sizes ranging from 8-15gb. So, I started using the Normal Preset and I'm quite happy with the resolution, picture playback, file sizes and speed. Now, most of my Blu Rays will encode between 2.5hrs. to 5 hrs. with sizes between 2-6gb. There are a few movies though, that once I'm done encoding the 350 Blu Rays, that I will go back and redo with better settings. But, for now they still look excellent. The best thing I did was to hard-wire my ATV3, because of the large file sizes and the numerous dead spots in my home from my lousy wireless router.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Currently for ripped movies I run through Subler as an easy way to add things.

Subler does the job too. If you are good with that, you don't need MetaZ or MetaX or similar. The main idea is being confident you tagged them outside of iTunes if you want to do the "delete-move-import" solution. Nothing very painful can happen either way but if the metatags are NOT in the files, you'll have some missing bits of file information when you re-import them again (so it's just a bit more work to bring them back to as they are now).

And I too tagged all of my home movies with individual posters and made them "TV Shows" so that they would organize by year. That was great in TV1 but is broken in TV3 (they still organize by year but share one poster for all files within any given year). I hate it when Apple takes away good features like full "show" tag support (in "Movies" too) and things like individual posters for each media file.

----------

I began using ATV2 then ATV3 Presets,and was unhappy with the encoding time and file size. My times were nothing less than 11 hrs with most being anywhere from 15-18 hrs, with sizes ranging from 8-15gb. So, I started using the Normal Preset and I'm quite happy with the resolution, picture playback, file sizes and speed. Now, most of my Blu Rays will encode between 2.5hrs. to 5 hrs. with sizes between 2-6gb.

You are trading off a lot of fine detail when you do this. And you are trading off resolution when you use the TV2 preset (about a million pixel difference between 720p and 1080p).

You might want to render a single chapter from 4 or 5 movies and then use "Normal" and maybe "High Profile" presets, 720p vs. 1080p. Then pull them into iTunes and push them through your TV3 for some head-to-head testing. If you care about fine detail in the picture, it should show with such dramatic differences in file sizes. Be sure to find a chapter of dark (nighttime) material as at least one of your tests.

Nothing wrong with "Normal"... just pointing out that you are shifting a very long way from Blu Ray master to end result. If you mostly watch on smaller screens (like iPads or iPhones), the head-to-head probably won't show much to you. But on bigger screens- like a big 1080p HDTV- I bet you will see the differences.

As far as how long it was taking, that's directly tied to speed of your system. 15-18 hours suggests you could use newer hardware, especially if you are going to be processing 350 BDs. I have a 2010 iMac and the average conversion is about 2-3 hours. Even newer machines does it even faster than that. Based on those times, I would guess you have a 2005-7 laptop? If you have some spare cash, upgrade. For the task of converting 350BDs, you could really use some faster horses.

 

[mic j]

Subler does the job too. If you are good with that, you don't need MetaZ or MetaX or similar. The main idea is being confident you tagged them outside of iTunes if you want to do the "delete-move-import" solution. Nothing very painful can happen either way but if the metatags are NOT in the files, you'll have some missing bits of file information when you re-import them again (so it's just a bit more work to bring them back to as they are now).

And I too tagged all of my home movies with individual posters and made them "TV Shows" so that they would organize by year. That was great in TV1 but is broken in TV3 (they still organize by year but share one poster for all files within any given year). I hate it when Apple takes away good features like full "show" tag support (in "Movies" too) and things like individual posters for each media file.

----------


Based on those times, I would guess you have a 2005-7 laptop?

I have a 2009 2.66 duo core and it can take that long. And I don't consider a 3 year old machine to be ancient. I think the improvement seen with the 2010+ models is due to having multicore CPU. HB is very good at utilizing multicore CPU, which of course will really speed up the processing. So I am just going to have to grin and bear it for a couple years as I am not going to go spend $3K on a new MBP just so I can drop movie encode time (and have mirroring capability). In all other respects, the 2009 MBP is just fine.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Certainly, I'm not putting down what you have at all and hope you don't take it that way. I'm just seeing 15-18 hours per disc and 350 discs vs. about 3 hours for discs on my own iMac and recognizing the opportunity. Yes, multicore really does make a difference for this kind of task.

Maybe instead of a few years of work, you & Cobra can borrow a few other computers from friends and get multiple conversions going on several machines? Or maybe even buy a used 2010-11 model, do the conversions much more quickly, then sell it?

It's too bad there is not a service for this kind of thing: send your BD collection to them and their big farm of fast processors converts them for you.

 

[mic j]

Certainly, I'm not putting down what you have at all and hope you don't take it that way. I'm just seeing 15-18 hours per disc and 350 discs vs. about 3 hours for discs on my own iMac and recognizing the opportunity. Yes, multicore really does make a difference for this kind of task.

Maybe instead of a few years of work, you & Cobra can borrow a few other computers from friends and get multiple conversions going on several machines? Or maybe even buy a used 2010-11 model, do the conversions much more quickly, then sell it?

It's too bad there is not a service for this kind of thing: send your BD collection to them and their big farm of fast processors converts them for you.

Not taking any offense. Just pointing out that you do not have to have an ancient machine for this to be problem and improvements to the problem come on the 2010+ units.

Also, I do not have 350+ BD backlog that needs converting. I stay with dvd's unless the movie content really benefits from BD quality (action, sci-fi, etc).