FLAC counterpart in videos?.

[vrpatilisl]

heloo

Is there any FLAC counterpart in videos. or this idea at all not applicable to videos.:helpful:

[raffriff42]

"FLAC counterpart" ...meaning free and lossless?
Magicyuv (http://www.magicyuv.com/), Grass Valley Lossless (http://www.videohelp.com/software/Grass-Valley-HQX-Codec)...

free, open source and lossless?
Hufyuv (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huffyuv), Lagarith (http://lags.leetcode.net/codec.html), Utvideo (http://www.videohelp.com/software/Ut-Video-Codec-Suite)

free, open source, lossless and high bit depth?
ffmpeg: FFV1 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFV1)

[minaust]

heloo

Is there any FLAC counterpart in videos. or this idea at all not applicable to videos.:helpful:
...assuming you can tolerate really big video files, yes.

If so, just remux original content into your desired container. MakeMKV does that now.

EDIT: I just did two lossless encode of a BD movie trailer, source rip by MakeMKV. I did two different encodes - one with FFV1, the other with x264 lossless. The original mkv is 319mb. The FFV1 encode is 724mb, and the x264 encode is 845mb. Why bother? Just keep the original, not a bloated oversized copy.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

free, open source, lossless and high bit depth?
ffmpeg: FFV1 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFV1)

...and very slow ;)

BTW: Yet another option would be H.264/AVC in "lossless" mode.

[kuchikirukia]

Is there any FLAC counterpart in videos.

--preset placebo

[sneaker_ger]

Slow encoding does not equal lossless encoding. Lossless encoding can be achieved using any preset, only --qp 0 (x264) or --lossless (x265) options need to be set.

[kuchikirukia]

it's a joke

[Asmodian]

FLAC in video is reasonable, I often use FLAC when compressing bluray sources. A FLAC encode is usually a tiny bit smaller than the original lossless audio file on the disc.

...assuming you can tolerate really big video files, yes.

If so, just remux original content into your desired container. MakeMKV does that now.

EDIT: I just did two lossless encode of a BD movie trailer, source rip by MakeMKV. I did two different encodes - one with FFV1, the other with x264 lossless. The original mkv is 319mb. The FFV1 encode is 724mb, and the x264 encode is 845mb. Why bother? Just keep the original, not a bloated oversized copy.

It would be a very bad lossy codec that would be larger than a lossless copy of it and the quality can never be better than the source because the lossless codec saves all the original's errors perfectly. Lossless compression is for saving intermediate edits or original captures and can often get 4:1 compression ratios with video but, usually not a lot better than that. We can also use a lossless final format for audio because an extra few hindered megabytes per hour is fine. ;)

Uncompressed 1920x1080x24x12 (bluray, 1080p YouTube, etc.) is 583200 kbps or 71.2 MB/s, even at a lossless 4:1 that is still 17.8 MB/s.

[hcrs]

Uncompressed 1920x1080x24x12 (bluray, 1080p YouTube, etc.) is 583200 kbps or 71.2 MB/s, even at a lossless 4:1 that is still 17.8 MB/s.
So what? Yes, 2 minutes 1080p trailer of Tears of Steel is 6GiB when it comes in RAW YUV. But it is very handy for evaluating performance of codecs right way. I.e. when one gives a real picture to various codecs and checking how they perform against each other, getting real source picture. Rather than recompressing already compressed thing just to learn how well new compression would develop pre-existing compression artifacts, which is nowhere close to fair codecs comparison.

But if someone isn't up for things like this, uncompressed and even lossless-compressed videos are LARGE. The only things which could compress reasonably are screencasts, if one is ok with simplified desktop look and feel to improve compressibility.

p.s. VP9 also got "lossless" mode, but still, VP9 could do some subsampling, which isn't exactly lossless. But IIRC one can disable it.

[huhn]

It would be a very bad lossy codec that would be larger than a lossless copy of it and the quality can never be better than the source because the lossless codec saves all the original's errors perfectly. Lossless compression is for saving intermediate edits or original captures and can often get 4:1 compression ratios with video but, usually not a lot better than that. We can also use a lossless final format for audio because an extra few hindered megabytes per hour is fine. ;)

this can happen with dts : http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=164935

[nevcairiel]

this can happen with dts : http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=164935

Its just how CBR codecs work, if you tell it to use a certain bitrate, it will do so, no matter if the audio could compress much better.