I think this is always 2-folded:

- there need to be industry standards implemented into a vast majority of playback devices
- open source encoders for this standards need to be convenient and powerful

Both points are gaining speed slowly for H.265 at the moment, so I think we are not there within the next 2 years.

The screens are probably HDR converted to SDR, so I wouldn't take much out of that, as there is no standardized conversion method.

(2018-01-15, 09:53 PM)Stamper Wrote: I think the way downloads on the scene are going is that SDR 1080p (or H264) is slowly being phased out. Some bloggers who do fanres stuff already switched to H265, leaving a trail of fans behind. Soon it's gonna be H265 1080p or 4K, no more H264 stuff.

Unlikely unless for low-quality stuff. x264 still has the edge currently, x265 needs more development or something. At least when it comes to grain.

(2018-01-15, 09:53 PM)Stamper Wrote: I think the way downloads on the scene are going is that SDR 1080p (or H264) is slowly being phased out.

No it's not

(2018-01-15, 09:53 PM)Stamper Wrote: Some bloggers who do fanres stuff already switched to H265, leaving a trail of fans behind.

As Ian Faith would say, 'their appeal is becoming more selective'

(2018-01-15, 09:53 PM)Stamper Wrote: Soon it's gonna be H265 1080p or 4K, no more H264 stuff.

No it's not

(2018-01-16, 04:29 AM)zoidberg Wrote:

(2018-01-15, 09:53 PM)Stamper Wrote: Soon it's gonna be H265 1080p or 4K, no more H264 stuff.

No it's not

Yes it will, sooner or later... not so soon IMHO - we still have MPEG-2 SDTV/HDTV/DVD after all...

Everything happens sooner or later spoRv. I just haven't seen anything yet to suggest that x265 offers anything hugely beneficial for our kind of projects (high quality, grainy) beyond a slightly smaller file size and substantially longer encode time.

(2018-01-16, 05:00 AM)zoidberg Wrote: Everything happens sooner or later spoRv. I just haven't seen anything yet to suggest that x265 offers anything hugely beneficial for our kind of projects (high quality, grainy) beyond a slightly smaller file size and substantially longer encode time.

Agree! Let's continue with our good and tested x264 encoder, waiting for the moment x265 would be better (or at least the same) with objectively smaller size AND same, if not shorter, encode time. Probably it will take few years, we'll see it. And think we still like to watch analog SD video media, like laserdisc and VHS!

x265 already seems better in some limited aspects. For example I've seen convincing tests showing that it's better at compressing nearly grain-free anime. On grain and mid-bitrate it pretty much consistently is even worse than x264 tho. Give it some more time and it may catch up and even get better than x264 maybe - I wouldn't get my hopes up about encoding times tho, it being a more complex codec.

I was talking french scene. One major french torrent site went down, and has been replaced by another, where maybe half the uploads are H265. That means Blu-ray rips, original H264, are all converted to H265 to save space and make quicker downloads with same quality.

HDR are mostly remuxes, and some compressed versions in H265. When some people are asking for H264 versions in the comments, they get rebuffed. I think it shows a trend that is going to expand. Also unlike other trackers, full blu-rays are being phased out.

The french repack scene (where they get the HD from a foreign release, and resync it to french & english tracks) is I'm guessing now about 70% going H265. I think it's a sign of change that is going to be widespread as time go by.

I'm all for H264 though, it's been around and is fairly stable in quality.

The problem is that the "50% space, same quality" thing is just marketing, it's not the truth for anything but a limited set of contexts and very specific measurement methods (PSNR?). If you compare screenshots or look at most x265 encodes, they just don't hold up, even at identical bitrates. Look at the h265 UHD Blu Ray of the old Blade Runner - lots of compression artifacts in the noise. Not pretty to look at - and that's with somewhat decent bitrates.

It makes sense too, when you consider how exactly they're achieving those savings, which is partly by increasing the maximum block size from I think 16 to 64. In flat scenes this can greatly save space, but it can also result in pretty ugly blocking or in the case of h265 (which I think seems to use some sophisticated deblocking) smearing and banding.

You may nevertheless be right about the trend. It's nothing new that trends and mainstream perception does not always follow the complete truth but rather the truth that is most well sold. I personally can't see such a trend on the trackers I'm on though (none of which are French tho!).

For instance, PTP (a very old and well known and esteemed tracker) does not allow 1080p h265 encodes.

x264 is where it's at right now and for some time to come.


Actually Tom, I'd say it is the truth that sells the most, that is being peddled like a golden egg-crapping goose.