Why aren't we using this yet?
Because it's not ready yet.
>>138249277
In what way?
>>138249291
I'm not an expert.
From lurking the threads I remember that:
1) apparently it's good for low-end encodes, such as the ones that live-action movies typically receive.
2) The 40% save in space is a myth that only works for very low bitrates. When you have grain, the file size goes through the roof.
3) Daiz said not to use it yet.
>>138249331
I see. Thank you for explaining.
HEVC is a meme.
Makes your video card nice and toasty
>>138249217
Can it run on my toaster?
If no, there you have the answer.
>>138249926
Get a new toaster, poorfag.
>>138249926
What kind of toaster are we talking about? A C2D should still be enough for 1280x720 HEVC.
Have you tried Underwater's Ajin? That's using HEVC for instance.
>>138250424
>What kind of toaster are we talking about?
A shitty one from 2007 that had only his graphics card changed after the old one died.
>comparing the encoders instead of the codecs
Every time.
sage
>>138250558
Still way better than what I had up to last year
>>138249926
You can't run 1080p 10-bit h.264 on your toaster either but it's still used.
>>138250424
>A C2D should still be enough for 1280x720 HEVC
Hell no. Lower end C2Ds can't even do some 1280x720 10-bit h.264 encodes.
>>138250558
>That's what's called a toaster nowadays
I tried some HEVC archives and they run with some lag. You'll be fine.
>>138250713
No one gives a fuck about 1080p until it actually starts airing in that format.
>>138250726
It is a toaster. I can't watch youtube 720p 60 fps videos without it stopping every few seconds.
Which doesn't make absolutely any sense. I can play some old games at 1050p over 60 fps, but can't watch a youtube video of the same game at 720p 60 fps.
>>138249331
A month or so ago daiz tweeted about its progress and the intuitive impression I got from it was "six months."
>>138250713
>Hell no. Lower end C2Ds can't even do some 1280x720 10-bit h.264 encodes.
My T7500 could handle 1080p 10bit.
>>138250786
>No one gives a fuck about 1080p until it actually starts airing in that format.
Depends on the source. Usually 720p is a downscale. Not by much, but it still is. Which means that 1080p, even being an upscale, is better.
I do the encoding for a sub group and can tell you exactly why we're not using it: because every time we've tested it, it causes MPC to randomly crash during playback.
>>138249331
1) True
2) Not any more so that X264. X265 can handle higher bitrates so qualityfags will make bigger files.
3) When you can encode X265 in hardware at the same rate as X264 we'll see an explosion of X265 adoption. What Daiz says is irrelevant.
Just ask the man directly.
>>138250961
>What Daiz says is irrelevant.
10-bit was such a success.
>>138249331
>Daiz said
I downloaded Kumiko The Treasure Hunter in HEVC, and it played fine with MPC - MadVr. Did make my graphics card's fan go a bit harder than normal, though.
is this the daiz circlejerk metashitposting thread?
>>138250786
>It is a toaster. I can't watch youtube 720p 60 fps videos without it stopping every few seconds.
try using mpv instead. Just download mpv and put youtube-dl in the same directory, then do
mpv youtubeurl
and I guarantee you that 1080p60 won't be a problem anymore. I know because I have an atom 1.7ghz single core and they run fine, while ANY kind of youtube stream from youtube has around 10 fps.
>>138249331
>3) Daiz said not to use it yet.
Sounds like a good reason to use it.
I'd really like to kill that cunt.
>>138250961
>2
The point is that x264 looks better at high bit-rates then x265 currently.
While x265 looks better at low bit-rates that kind of shitty quality should be reserved for streamfags, almost all current BD encodes will not benefit from switching to x265 until they can get good quality at high bitrates.
>>138251575
Yeah well unless you got a gtx 960 your computer will need quite a lot of power to decode x265 which hurts the quality even more since you won't be able to run high end upscaling algorithms at the same time on a toaster anymore.
The gtx 960 is currently the only GPU on the market with X265 decoding, (yep not even the 980ti can do it). The new generation of GPUs launching soon will fully support it though with a hardware decoder on the cards.
>>138252186
just to be clear: are you saying that at high bitrates x265 looks worse than x264 at the SAME bitrate?
>>138249217
Because 30%-50% smaller size on same crf value is achievable only when encoding time is 8 times longer
>>138252280
>Yeah well unless you got a gtx 960
Fucking please, an i3 alone can handle it.
You people are fucking clueless.
>>138252288
At the same high bitrate, yes. go read up about it on the doom9 forums for comparisons etc.
x265 does not cope well with grain either.
>>138252371
That's really not my point, i never said that it wasn't possible on a toaster. My point is that without hardware decoder you will use up a lot of system resources, and those resources could be better used for an upscaler like NNEDI for instance.
>>138252696
>could be better used for an upscaler like NNEDI
0/10 try harder
>>138252332
Encoding time is not the reason people aren't using it...
>>138252280
Only if you hardware accelerate. decent enough CPU can handle them.
>>138252727
Yes it is.
Since most subber are huge attention whore, them being late to the party by a day or two is a big deal for them.
>>138251081
>10-but H.265
Tell me he's joking.
Though, Coding Tree Units are a pretty interesting primitive for animation since so much of the scene is static. H.265 should have much better compression ratios compared to H.264 (for standard non-action scenes) if encoders can actually exploit this, in that respect I would have thought a SoL like Dagashi Kashi would be a be a better first test-case.
>>138252821
But they're already late compared to HS either way.
Once CR switches to HEVC I bet they're going to use that new Protected Video Path DRM baked in all new hardware. Horriblesubs probably won't be able to rip that one for a while if ever. Just letting you guys know. Oh yeah, right, nobody cares until it goes into effect and fucks you in the ass.
>>138252865
Seeing how the anon said 8 times longer, there would be a huge difference between now and then.
If they are late now a day, they would be late then a week.
>>138252821
No it's not.
Sub groups are aiming for quality. x265 is still not mature enough, see Underwater's Ajin. Even fucking KamiFS' encodes look better, it's ridiculous.
>>138252922
>Once CR switches to HEVC
Do they even care about it at all?
>>138252951
They're not days late because the encoding takes so long.
>>138253008
Considering how the blame absolutely everything, including Trump on pirates, yes they care.
>>138252922
>Protected Video Path DRM
If you're talking about the HDCP implementation in Windows Vista, that hasn't been relevant since... fuck, Windows Vista.
Besides, even if somehow they magically make unbreakable DRM, I'm sure Commie will still be around subbing camrips.
Never, because Nyaa's now a CR/Funi honeypot.
>>138249217
Why don't we use VP9?
>>138253994
Because we're not streamfags?
>>138249217
just recently watched entire Game of Thrones in HEVC the picture looked great, and only 1gb per episode.
The same reason MP3 is still used even though it's been replaced 3 times over.
Pirates are morons.
>>138255539
ear cant hear over 320kbps
>>138254100
While it's true that the main usage of VP8 is streaming, the VPX codec is being developed to be a serious competitor to HEVC.
How come the bald man isn't here yet?
>>138255584
ears can hear a lot of things.
>>138255584
If you have shitty audio gears that is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20PwaJYcnuk
>>138250558
Upgrade to Windows 7
>>138256040
>the VPX codec is being developed to be a serious competitor to HEVC.
Yes, and when I make a post on 4chan I hope to get the Pulitzer price for it.
because h265 was apparently designed for nvidia's 900 overpriced 900 meme line
i wouldn't trust nvidia not to push something into their drivers to fuck up 265 encodes as soon as their 1000 line is out soon, just like they're doing to vidya with gameworks
>>138257420
>overpriced 900 meme line
Only the cheaper models have it
>>138257420
The only 900 card that supports h265 is the 960, nice try.
>>138259171
Howcome they decided to do this? Is the 960 just being used a test bed for future releases? Or to keep cost down on higher priced cards?
>>138259171
950 has it as well
>>138259309
960 and 950 have their newest chips, the older chips on the other models don't support it yet.
>>138257420
>>138259309
>>138259549
Who gives a fuck about hardware decoding? If you have such a card you can just decode it in software.
>>138259656
Doesn't hardware decoding greatly reduce the workload on your system?
>>138260235
No.
It might however handle that workload more efficiently.
C U T E
U
T
E
>>138249217
Bowling-ball man is holding it back.
Specialists, are Doki H.265 releases good, picture-wise?
They certainly weigh less.
>>138260665
download it and compare faggot
>>138261183
I asked specialists, sit down.
>>138250888
can you give me some encode tips?
>>138253169
He isn't.
This is something a lot scarier.
Thankfully, hdcp is cracked, so that's a valid technique to capture it, but it means rather than ripping, you have to play the whole episode and record that...
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&q=cache%3Awww.alexrad.me%2Fdiscourse%2Fwhy-rosyna-cant-take-a-movie-screenshot.html
>>138263073
Don't they say That you are allowed one digital copy per purchase of a physical copy? If thats the case why do they continue to try to stop me from riping the disk that i fucken paid for?
http://www.asus.com/Graphics-Cards/GTX950-2G/overview/
Should I buy this, /a/?
HEVC 10bit fixed function hardware decoding for lowest CPU usage, 75W so no external PCIe power connector needed
Phil-raws guy(?) does HEVC now. It looks stellar.
His encodes have historically been top rate anyways.
>>138263254
Because they don't have to respect that right.
You are supposed to be allowed to back up your media.
But, cracking DRM is illegal, so if the DRM blocks you from making backups....
If someone took a company to court and demanded to be able to make backups, they might win, but they couldn't just crack the DRM to make backup.
(Assuming burgerland laws)
>>138263372
No, wait for things to mature more
>>138263413
Also, you could certainly make a backup of the encrypted, drmed up raw files, but good luck playing those.
So, ripping a those fancy new 4k online activation blurays to an iso is perfectly legal, but good luck ever playing that iso, even if you burnt it to a disk.
So you probably wouldn't win the law suit, since technically you can make backups, and they have more lawyers.
And since you'd be going up against the media industry, it'd be a crazy expensive law suit too.
>>138263491
There's nothing more to mature, GM206 was released in 2015 and HEVC decoding was enabled since last year, it's already fully supported in LAV since last year
>>138263511
I guess this world has no hope of balance.
>>138263631
It does.
The system is about to collapse. Give it a few more decades.
The only real problem is, we won't acquire balance even then. The rich will still be filthy rich, and nothing will really change other than that nothing works anymore unless you are filthy rich.
>What is Underwater's release of Aijin encoded in, Alex?
>>138263717
>It does
>The rich will still be filthy rich, and nothing will really change
>>138263996
The "It does" refers to the hope of balance, not the balance itself.
The bit below is my assessment of what is going to happen. Somebody else might be more optimistic.
>>138264079
I see
>>138264079
Humanity will go extinct instead.
>>138252829
>Tell me he's joking.
why would he? 10bit gives you cheaper shallow gradients and moves the dithering to the decoder side. and anime is full of gradients.
>>138263372
just CPU-decode.
>>138252332
Is encoding time actually relevant in the context of fansubs? Like do current encodes take multiple hours to make?
I always assumed it was relatively quick. I'll admit I've no personal experience though so could be a dumb assumption.
>>138250424
isn't Ajin all CG?
>>138264690
I'm pretty sure it's not all cute girls.
>>138264537
There is a 3-way tradeoff between CPU-cycles spent, bitrate and visual quality.
Simplified said: HEVC partially achieves its superior visual quality by enabling you to burn even more CPU cycles in a useful manner on various new analysis steps.
So if you want good visual results on a small file size you need to crank up the settings to spend more CPU. Hardware encoders are equivalent to the lower end of the tradeoff spectrum where you get higher bitrates for the same quality.
So to get encodes done in a timely manner you need some expensive multicore or even multi-socket CPUs.
If you tried it on an i3 with high quality settings it would take hours.
>>138264836
>If you tried it on an i3 with high quality settings it would take hours.
Oh no, hours! !SRUOH ON HO
