2018-01-16, 11:37 AM
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.
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.