Quote:
Originally Posted by burfadel
If the lower quality is attributed to a lower bitrate of ~15 percent (may vary) for a given CRF, it sounds reasonable to say that for a set bitrate the quality would be noticeably improved. It would also be reasonable to suggest to patch x264 to increase the bitrate used in CRF mode since you now have some spare, to the point where the image quality is actually improved (and still probably saving some bitrate)! It doesn't matter if the SSIM is reasonably higher in this case, the main point would be the increased quality at a given CRF whilst still saving a few percentage points of quality for most encodes. Complaints only occur if people have to change the CRF they use from say, 24 to 22 to make up the shortfall in quality.
To summarise, regardless of bitrate saving it would be more important to adjust CRF mode so people can use the same settings in CRF mode and have better quality, without using more bitrate!
|
Improvements are always welcome.
On the other hand, given the time-consuming process of empirically finding a new CRF value range by each user, the less CRF changes, the better.
As things stand, it would seems wise (as in : user-friendly) to add this new patch as an option, as has been suggested in the earlier post
cheers
audyovydeo