Which video container is best, AVI, MKV, MP4...

[jvl711]

I am encoding some videos to x.264 and am not sure if there is benifits to using one container over another.

I am was trying to convert files with handbreak to x.264 @ 1200 kbits MKV with AC3 audio using the film presets.

I was also wondering if there is a way to increase the seek performance on these files. No matter what fast forward I use the file will only skip 10secs ahead, and the skip is a little slow.

Any other advice would be greatly appreciated. I am new to encoding things into x.264.

Thanks,
Josh

[reggie14]

You're using the film preset with MKV? I can't get it to work. The video always comes out choppy- both on my PC and the extender. I can use other presets with AC3 in an MKV container just fine, but there's something about the film preset that gives me problems.

I'd actually love to see a thread that discusses the conversion tools. Handbrake is easy to use, but for some reason it doesn't like me. I guess a lot of people here use AutoMKV, but its a bit more daunting to use than Handbrake.

[evilpenguin]

I think the choppiness comes from the number of b-frames (6+) used in the film/TV presets x264 options.
http://trac.handbrake.fr/wiki/BuiltInPresets

Give "Deux Six Quatre" a try, its almost the same codec/container, but different x264 options.

(Edit: I'm prolly wrong, listen to dvd_maniac, he knows what he's talking about )

[dvd_maniac]

I think the choppiness comes from the number of b-frames (6+) used in the film/TV presets x264 options.

Although I do not use Handbrake (I use Staxrip), I do not have any chopiness issues and I use 9 B-frames and 9 ref-frames on all my encodes.

[jvl711]

I did not notice any choppyness on the videos that I encoded with the film preset on the HD Extender. I did not try it on a client yet, but client performance was not a large priority to me.

[valnar]

Originally Posted by dvd_maniac

Although I do not use Handbrake (I use Staxrip), I do not have any chopiness issues and I use 9 B-frames and 9 ref-frames on all my encodes.

I can't believe that would work for 1080p videos though. Not sure about 720p. Does it?

Robert

[MTuckman]

I'm using Handbrake and the File preset for most of my conversions and they play and look great on the HD extender.

I do run the resulting file through mkvmerge to create the cue points so I can ff/rew the video - http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/show...567#post257567

[osburnfamily]

I've used FairUse DVD Wizard for years (paid full version).

With their recent 2.8 update, they are "temporarily" giving the full 2.8 release away for FREE. Watch out with the install though, you have the option to include a bundled toolbar (I'm guessing that's why it's free). BUT, you don't have to include it.

FairUse allows for VC1 (via VFW/WMP11 Install), divx, VP7, H264 (via x264)--

I've always used the AVI container--however, I am re-looking into that choice. FU supports AVI, MKV, & OGM containers.

I'm right there with ya on most of it. Using 1200bps as the target bitrate. Using x264 as the FOURCC. Using AC3 as the audio. Using AVI as the container.

I'm considering switching to 1200bitrate, VC1 FOURCC, AC3 Audio, & MKV Container. BUT I'd love to hear other thoughts!

[Taddeusz]

I've come to prefer MKV over AVI. I've been lead to believe and it's been my own personal observation that AVI is not fully capable of handling H.264 video. When I first started converting my DVD's I was using H.264 video and AC3 audio in an AVI container. I started noticing that my videos were playing choppy on my HD Extender. I messed around with using an MKV container and all of a sudden the very same video was silky smooth. I would never have thought that the container itself would make such a difference but it did. All my videos since have been done in an MKV container with H.264 video and AC3 or DTS audio. I haven't had a problem since.

The only thing I wish is that SageTV supported soft MKV subtitles. Until then I'll keep burning the subtitles into the few titles that have them.

[osburnfamily]

The only thing I wish is that SageTV supported soft MKV subtitles. Until then I'll keep burning the subtitles into the few titles that have them.

Can you expand on this a bit for me? One of the things leading me to move to MKV was the ability to include subtitles. Using FairUse I've always sacrifices the ability to include my subtitles in my AVi's because it was an all or nothing thing--meaning since it was AVI, I could include the subtitles; but, it would bake it into the main video & I couldn't turn it off. My understanding with MKV is that I would have that ability.?

Would Sage support that?

[evilpenguin]

I've heard that Sage is working on subtitles from mkv/mp4 files, but its not in yet.

[Taddeusz]

Originally Posted by osburnfamily

Can you expand on this a bit for me? One of the things leading me to move to MKV was the ability to include subtitles. Using FairUse I've always sacrifices the ability to include my subtitles in my AVi's because it was an all or nothing thing--meaning since it was AVI, I could include the subtitles; but, it would bake it into the main video & I couldn't turn it off. My understanding with MKV is that I would have that ability.?

Would Sage support that?

I use AutoMKV to convert my DVD's. It has an option to "burn subtitles" which basically means it renders the subtitles right into the video. I would like to not have to do that but right now SageTV doesn't give me a choice.

And yes, I had contacted support about MKV multiple audio track and subtitle support and got a reply back saying that it was being worked on for a future version. MKV support is rather new to SageTV so I don't expect everything that it offers to be supported immediately. But I do expect that it will be supported eventually. While MKV isn't really in the mainstream yet it is far more compatible and extensible than the rather archaic AVI container. I expect it to be around quite a bit longer and become more of an accepted container format.

Edit: to be more specific and expound more. Yes, MKV supports soft subtitles. Either graphical subtitles like in DVD's or ASCII subtitles. However, SageTV does not yet support soft subtitles. The only way you can get them currently is to render them into the video.

[osburnfamily]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

Edit: to be more specific and expound more. Yes, MKV supports soft subtitles. Either graphical subtitles like in DVD's or ASCII subtitles. However, SageTV does not yet support soft subtitles. The only way you can get them currently is to render them into the video.

Great. That's actually the specific info I was looking for. I can live with Sage not display the "soft" subt's--for now at least. Since I'm not burning in the ST's in my AVI's now anyway. But it's a comfort to know that I can start including them if I switch to MKV knowing that it would at least be a future option. Whereas with AVI I know I'll never have the option.

thanks!

[valnar]

At least with MKV files, you know you can create them now with subtitles as an option to render in programs like Media Player Classic. When Sage comes around, you'll be ready. It also supports chapter points. Sage does not yet, but once they get the format down, I see no reason why they couldn't.

Although mentioned in other threads but not this one - the biggest reason to use Mastroka files is it supports anything, and well. MP4 is another good alternative to AVI, but it does not support AC3/DTS. MKV wins by default and luckily it's a good one.

See here for more comparisons of containers. BTW, the only reason AVI supports as much as it does is because it's so old (read: common) that people like to create hacks to shoehorn other formats into it. It's still not a good container though. You can only polish a t___ so much.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...tainer_formats

-Robert

[evilpenguin]

FWIW, i've also found that the tools to work with mp4 files (mp4box, mp4creator) are *much* more problematic than the tools for working with mkv (mkvmerge).

[osburnfamily]

Out of curiosity, what's the current "popular" dvd-to-mkv (via VC1) tool out there? I've see AutoMKV in the past; but, I've heard they're no longer in production? Is there something newer?

[valnar]

Originally Posted by osburnfamily

Out of curiosity, what's the current "popular" dvd-to-mkv (via VC1) tool out there? I've see AutoMKV in the past; but, I've heard they're no longer in production? Is there something newer?

Wha?

AutoMKV is actively developed, faster and more often than most tools.

Robert

[osburnfamily]

Well, now that you say that--I'm not sure! I thought I read it on VideoHelp.org. Hey, if not--great!

The only thing with AutoMKV is that I haven't figured out how to use MKV Containers with VC1 encoding. Seem with AMKV I am restricted to the WMV container-- & that doesn't give me non-burned subtitles (I don't think).

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by evilpenguin

I think the choppiness comes from the number of b-frames (6+) used in the film/TV presets x264 options.
http://trac.handbrake.fr/wiki/BuiltInPresets

Give "Deux Six Quatre" a try, its almost the same codec/container, but different x264 options.

After doing some more testing, I think its an issue with using the strict anamorphic PAR setting. It turns out its not unique to the MKV container, or the film preset. It also seems to only happen when the aspect ratio is 1.78 (or, at least, when its not 1.33). Things look fine with loose anamorphic set instead, and I don't see a particularly good reason to use strict anamorphic over loose anamorphic.

[jvl711]

Originally Posted by reggie14

After doing some more testing, I think its an issue with using the strict anamorphic PAR setting. It turns out its not unique to the MKV container, or the film preset. It also seems to only happen when the aspect ratio is 1.78 (or, at least, when its not 1.33). Things look fine with loose anamorphic set instead, and I don't see a particularly good reason to use strict anamorphic over loose anamorphic.

Hmm... I have been using the strict anamorphic PAR, and I have not seen any issues with the HD Extender.

I would think the reason you would not see the issue with the 1.33 movies is because it is not anamorphic, so the setting is probally ignored.