Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I don't have an iPhone nor a video iPod. All my movies are just for TV use only. So ripping them at full anamorphic resolution is key for me. You can rip them at what you want as long as it looks good to you. I personally think 640 looks horrible on an HDTV because it's a small video stretched up to a large one.

I don't know if the iPods and iPhone can play a full sized video. And if it can, the file would take up too much space for what you'd lose anyway. I'd just assume re-rip the movie or show again at iPod/iPhone size when you decide to go out and delete it later. An on-the-fly thing. That way you get your TV version looking good and your iPod version optimized.

For animation I use what looks good.

For an example, South Park movie I ripped at 1000KBPs and it ends up at less than 700MB but looks almost perfect. So there's no real reason to go higher.

But on TV shows like Futurama and Simpsons I used 1500 or 1000. I'd use 2000 but I decided to save space. Especially since the video has horrible interlacing anyway that can't be remedied without losing a lot of detail and getting the "staircase effect". So 1500 is a compromise. They're not unwatchable. And remember, The Simpsons first 10 seasons weren't the best quality anyway. Only in the new millennium did the quality of the TV show match that of Futurama in picture quality. (i.e. how nicely the lines were drawn and colored in. Early Simpsons was a bit sloppy, so you're not really losing much by ripping lower.)

On Futurama at 1000 the show looks fine aside from the intro which has a lot going on so it looks compressed. Once you get into the show it looks better. I assume 2-pass would probably look better in these shows, so if you have the time, do it. Go 1500 if you want. A thing to note, Futurama DVD's were mastered with nice HDTV's in mind, (Especially since the show was originally mastered with nice 3D effects and digital painting as opposed to real paint and plastic cels.) but Simpsons DVD's, even the 9th season, are not really that great quality. So you can lose a bit on Simpsons if you want.

A 1000KBPs episode will be 187MB. A 1500KBPs episode will be 266MB. And a 2000KBPs episode will be 346MB. Plan accordingly.

Any yes, they're only 640x480 4:3 content at whatever bitrate you want.

Play around. Do a test rip of a show at 1000, 1500 and 2000 and watch them next to each other. See if you can find the differences and decide which is the lowest you can stand.
 
I'm wondering how long it normally takes for you to sync a 2GB movie from iTunes on your mac with your AppleTV. Seems to be about 15 hours from my PowerMac, although my wlan signal is at full speed. Can that be?
 
Yep it can be, but it shouldn't oughta

I'm wondering how long it normally takes for you to sync a 2GB movie from iTunes on your mac with your AppleTV. Seems to be about 15 hours from my PowerMac, although my wlan signal is at full speed. Can that be?

Do the following:
1. Unplug :apple:TV
2. Shut down computer
3. Unplug router (airport or whatever)

Let sit for 30 seconds. This is an excellent time to prepare a drink.

4. Plug in router.
5. Turn on computer.
6. Plug in :apple:TV

Voila! Enjoy fast transfer rates and your drink.

-- Mikie
 
Lastly, the same as above but in an Anamorphic non-16:9 format. It's thinner as you can see. This one is Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. For these movies you will need to open the Picture Settings sheet once after choosing the preset to fix its cropping as it's not set automatically until you do so. So don't forget or you will end up with either a movie ripped with the bars (Wasting valuable HD space and quality on blackness.) or a stretched picture. So DO IT! LOL

So, should i use HB's Anamorphic option even in that situation ? (Anamorphic non-16:9)
Thanks

Nico
 
If your ultimate destination is to a television screen (whether it be direct or through mirroring/spanning) I'd say yes, always use the anamorphic (PAR). I can't think of a real good example of when not to use it...
 
If your ultimate destination is to a television screen (whether it be direct or through mirroring/spanning) I'd say yes, always use the anamorphic (PAR). I can't think of a real good example of when not to use it...

I asked it because when i use the Anamorphic option in Picture i see a distort image.
Thanks

Nico
 
I have a question about audio.

It has English AC3 (5.1) listed and there are options under the pull-down menu to the right.

You can choose either, Dolby Surround, Dolby Pro Logic II, or 6-Channel discrete.

Which of these is the best choice, and will it even encode in 5.1? I remember reading that no matter what is chosen Handbrake still only encodes down to stereo.
 
Go with Pro Logic II (or better just leave it on automatic). A Pro logic II signal is backwards-compatible, so even a regular television can decode it. As for 5.1, I think Handbrake can do it, but the Apple TV will not pass that unmodified 5.1 to your stereo - it downmixes it. You would have to have you mac going straight to your stereo through the optical out (imac/mbo/mac mini) to get the 5.1. Hopefully the Apple TV will one day be firmware-updated to pass an unmodified 5.1 signal...
 
I don't really use 2-pass for time reasons. I haven't noticed much of a difference really but if you want to use it, use it. I don't. If I had time, or my processor could double pass it in the same amount of time, fine. But it just takes a bit too long for my tastes.

You can get about the same quality out of one and two pass encodes, but the two pass will be significantly smaller. As an example, a 2-pass encode at 1700kbps looks at least as good of not better than a 1-pass AppleTV preset encode at 2500kbps. That's a difference of about 700mb (~30%) per two hour movie.

A 500gb drive would hold 660 2 hour movies if you did a 2-pass encode, or 450 if you did the one pass, both with roughly the same visual quality. Now, the question then becomes are you willing to spend more money to save some time, or is saving some money more important, even if it takes a little longer to convert all your movies?

Also, I'd recommend that if you want to do a one-pass encode (indicating that time is a concern, but space is not) I'd really recommend using a constant quality setting NOT a fixed bitrate. You'll get varying sized movies, even if they're the same length, but you'll be able to get good, consistent quality from a single pass that way.

Personally, I use a two-pass method with advanced features tweaked to add extra quality for every bit used, but also to not slow the encode down TOO much (and also to ensure decent compatibility with lots of hardware decoding devices). I'd rather take a little more time to do the two code pass and get a good looking video in a smaller space.
 
Personally, I use a two-pass method with advanced features tweaked to add extra quality for every bit used, but also to not slow the encode down TOO much (and also to ensure decent compatibility with lots of hardware decoding devices). I'd rather take a little more time to do the two code pass and get a good looking video in a smaller space.

Hi,
what kind of "advanced features" are you using to convert your dvd ?
Thanks

nico
 
Hi,
what kind of "advanced features" are you using to convert your dvd ?
Thanks

nico

h264 has a lot of "advanced flags" that do all kinds of stuff I barely understand. The can improve quality at the expense of encode time, but not space, or vice versa. They can improve quality at the expense of space, but not time, etc etc. The use of different ones are what separate the Main Profile and the High Profile, etc. (I'm stating all of this because I'm assuming you didn't know what I was talking about as you used quotes around advanced features, my apologies if that's not the case).

In specific, though, I use this string of advanced features in Handbrake 0.9.0for movies I want better quality on, even though it slows encodes a bit:

ref=3:mixed-refs=1:bframes=3:bime=1:weightb=1:direct=auto:me=umh:trellis=1:no-fast-pskip=1:merange=3

and this one on movies where I want quality but not at the expense of speed:
ref=2:bframes=2:me=umh:mixed-refs=1:no-fast-pskip=1:direct=auto

I run the first one at 1700-2000 kbps depending on the title, and the second at 1200-1500, again depending on the title. I'm thinking of changing them slightly to improve/acheive AppleTV compatibility, though. I'm waiting to see if they announce anything about the ATV at the Sept 5 press event, like a price drop or 5.1 support, etc.

Movies made with both those playback fine on a 360 and on my Mac, but will probably stutter on an AppleTV due to the CABAC settings... if I were to go with a setting that improved ATV playback, I'd have to up the bitrate to 1400-1700 for the low end, and 1900-2200 or so for the high end (to acheive the same quality). I could probably get away with 1300 and 1800 and not really notice, though. Have to do some moer testing. :p

Hope that answers your question.
 
h264 has a lot of "advanced flags" that do all kinds of stuff I barely understand. The can improve quality at the expense of encode time, but not space, or vice versa. They can improve quality at the expense of space, but not time, etc etc. The use of different ones are what separate the Main Profile and the High Profile, etc. (I'm stating all of this because I'm assuming you didn't know what I was talking about as you used quotes around advanced features, my apologies if that's not the case).

Yes, that is the case :eek:

and this one on movies where I want quality but not at the expense of speed:
ref=2:bframes=2:me=umh:mixed-refs=1:no-fast-pskip=1:direct=auto

I think i'm going to use this extra setting

Hope that answers your question.

Yes, thanks a lot.
Nico
 
Yes, that is the case :eek:

I think i'm going to use this extra setting

Yes, thanks a lot.
Nico

Glad I could help - but I'm going to repeat my warning about AppleTV compatibility: that setting will very likely not play well on an AppleTV, so if you have one, are thinking about getting one, or think you might get one, DON'T use it. :) It looks good on my 360 though!

Also, I really recommend you go to the Handbrake page and read up... I'm probably the last person who should give advice on h264/x264 advanced options. :p I read all I could, played around with it, and just sort of picked settings that looked OK to me and fit in the size I was hoping to get for a two hour movie.

This is a great page to read about the presets in Handbrake .9 http://handbrake.m0k.org/trac/wiki/BuiltInPresets and this explains all the advanced features with some detail http://handbrake.m0k.org/trac/wiki/CLIGuide and finally the Handbrake forums, while full of a terrible combination of rude admins, developers, testers, and really dumb newbies is a great resource of info... http://handbrake.m0k.org/forum/
 
Glad I could help - but I'm going to repeat my warning about AppleTV compatibility: that setting will very likely not play well on an AppleTV, so if you have one, are thinking about getting one, or think you might get one, DON'T use it. :) It looks good on my 360 though!

Also, I really recommend you go to the Handbrake page and read up... I'm probably the last person who should give advice on h264/x264 advanced options. :p I read all I could, played around with it, and just sort of picked settings that looked OK to me and fit in the size I was hoping to get for a two hour movie.

In fact, i'm going to do some tryouts. And then play it to TV
Thanks

Nico
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.