H.264 or H.265?

[Black Diesel]

I know most computers struggle with H.265 but is it a better format to shoot in for “future proofing”? Is there any benefit to shooting H.265? This is for shooting 4k on the Mini 3 Pro

 

[StantonZ]

I know most computers struggle with H.265 but is it a better format to shoot in for “future proofing”? Is there any benefit to shooting H.265? This is for shooting 4k on the Mini 3 Pro

No...for the reason you pointed out. In fact, after taking everything into consideration (video quality/file size/portability), I ended up using H.264 and 1080p as my "default" video mode. Depending on the monitor size, most people can't even tell the difference.

 

[db4476]

I shoot primarily video these days and really have no preference, H.265 is technically superior in file size and bit rate, but some systems have problems with it. The claims of up to 50% improvement haven't panned out for me. H.264 works just fine, and that's primarily what I use. Sites like YouTube have H.264 as their standard, but will accept H.265 uploads. As for quality, unless you do a side be side comparison, a viewer would not notice any difference in the video.

Cheers!

 

[Black Diesel]

Okay, so it sounds like H.265 does offer a better quality image then correct? Even if it’s marginal, that’s what I want to know.

 

[db4476]

Not better image quality, but smaller file size and better bit rate. To me on a side by side comparison (split screen) I'd say that H.264 is slightly sharper, but it is not a large difference. Do some tests and decide for yourself.

Cheers!

 

[Saladshooter]

Okay, so it sounds like H.265 does offer a better quality image then correct? Even if it’s marginal, that’s what I want to know.

Yes.... if you were pixel peeping on a good monitor H265 does have better image quality and I mean if you were really zoomed in and peeping hard. For compatibility I still export in 4K H264.

 

[Eagle Eye 62]

Not better image quality, but smaller file size and better bit rate. To me on a side by side comparison (split screen) I'd say that H.264 is slightly sharper, but it is not a large difference. Do some tests and decide for yourself.

Cheers!

I would agree there is not much difference other than file size. I think h. 264 has to be less loss since the file size is bigger. It is also easier and faster to edit with than h. 265.

 

[akdrone]

I would agree there is not much difference other than file size. I think h. 264 has to be less loss since the file size is bigger. It is also easier and faster to edit with than h. 265.

Easier and faster to edit with 265? I keep reading how many computers choke on 265....

 

[Black Diesel]

Okay, so it sounds like if one wants to future proof their footage and get the best possible image quality then H.265 is the way to go even though current computers may struggle with it. In a few years the M2 or M3 MACs should handle it with ease and it's going to be viewed 5k monitors so I'll go with H.265

 

[brett8883]

I’m firmly in the H265 camp. A big thing is h264 doesn’t widely support 10 bit video and that’s a HUGE difference maker.

My last two computers ran H265 just as well as h264 and my latest M1 MacBook Pro may even run h265 better than h264 so I really wonder what computers people are using that struggle with h265. These must be machines that are older than 2016.

 

[db4476]

I’m firmly in the H265 camp. A big thing is h264 doesn’t widely support 10 bit video and that’s a HUGE difference maker.

My last two computers ran H265 just as well as h264 and my latest M1 MacBook Pro may even run h265 better than h264 so I really wonder what computers people are using that struggle with h265. These must be machines that are older than 2016.

Agreed, my PC is not that latest or fastest but handles h.265 easily. Your choice of editing software can be a problem though. I'm looking at you DaVinci.

Cheers!

 

[Eagle Eye 62]

Easier and faster to edit with 265? I keep reading how many computers choke on 265....

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I meant h. 264 is easier to edit with than h. 265

 

[Eagle Eye 62]

Agreed, my PC is not that latest or fastest but handles h.265 easily. Your choice of editing software can be a problem though. I'm looking at you DaVinci.

Cheers!

You make a good point. H. 265 being 10 bit is better If you plan to color grade but I don't think you will see much visual difference if not.

 

[Lister]

If your hardware can handle it, h.265 is the better choice. Smaller file sizes, better quality.

High Efficiency Video Coding - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[theDRONEranger]

Easier and faster to edit with 265? I keep reading how many computers choke on 265....

There are downloads to handle the H265, but for me H264 @ 1080 or 4K is wholly acceptable

 

[Hands Down]

Agreed, my PC is not that latest or fastest but handles h.265 easily. Your choice of editing software can be a problem though. I'm looking at you DaVinci.

Cheers!

I haven’t had any problems with Davinci 18 and H.265. What problems are you having?

Also, I haven’t tested this thoroughly, so it could have been a fluke. But I was experimenting with uploading H.264 and H.265 to Youtube. It seemed to me that Youtube did it’s “HD encoding” process much faster on the H.265 file. Anyone else noticed a difference with that?

 

[db4476]

I haven’t had any problems with Davinci 18 and H.265. What problems are you having?

Also, I haven’t tested this thoroughly, so it could have been a fluke. But I was experimenting with uploading H.264 and H.265 to Youtube. It seemed to me that Youtube did it’s “HD encoding” process much faster on the H.265 file. Anyone else noticed a difference with that?

H.265 and DaVinci work just fine for me. What I was alluding to is that DaVinci is a resource hog compared to Adobe, Lightworks, Filmora etc. DaVinci 18 is a big improvement over v17 and v16 but still falls behind the rest in terms of speed. It was so bad I quit using it for a while, but am back to editing with v18.

As to YouTube and H.265, I have noticed the same in terms of upload speed, perhaps it's the reduced file size.

Cheers!

 

[Hands Down]

H.265 and DaVinci work just fine for me. What I was alluding to is that DaVinci is a resource hog compared to Adobe, Lightworks, Filmora etc. DaVinci 18 is a big improvement over v17 and v16 but still falls behind the rest in terms of speed. It was so bad I quit using it for a while, but am back to editing with v18.

As to YouTube and H.265, I have noticed the same in terms of upload speed, perhaps it's the reduced file size.

Cheers!

Interesting. I don't have much basis for comparison. I used to use Vegas Pro on the desktop quite a few years ago. Then switched to using Lumafusion on the iPad almost exclusively.

Lately I'd been missing some of the more advanced features in desktop software so decided to give Resolve a shot. I liked the idea just purchasing a product instead of paying monthly for subscription software (looking at you Adobe ). Resolve seems to perform just fine for me. I do have a pretty late model computer and GPU... and my projects are fairly small.

 

[db4476]

Interesting. I don't have much basis for comparison. I used to use Vegas Pro on the desktop quite a few years ago. Then switched to using Lumafusion on the iPad almost exclusively.

Lately I'd been missing some of the more advanced features in desktop software so decided to give Resolve a shot. I liked the idea just purchasing a product instead of paying monthly for subscription software (looking at you Adobe ). Resolve seems to perform just fine for me. I do have a pretty late model computer and GPU... and my projects are fairly small.

I'm with you on subscriptions, as I avoid them when possible. It seems like there are diehard fans of the better known editors, where I choose the editor based on what I want to accomplish. I'll give credit to DaVinci for listening to the end users and fixing the major complaints in v16-v17, and now we're best buds once more. Editing is like photography/videography, you develop your own style and choose which tools to use.

Cheers!

 

[mathomas]

This might be common knowledge, but I thought I’d mention anyway:

If you’re having trouble with choppiness in h.265 (really any) high-res footage in Davinci Resolve, double-check that you are using proxies. You’ll need to first generate proxies for your clips, then set the timeline to use the 1/2 or 1/4 size proxies during editing. Makes a huge difference. There are some other optimizations, too, involving fusion (generally titles, in my case), color grading, etc. where the footage can be pre-processed and made more smooth during editing. I’m not at my real computer at the moment, and I can’t remember the exact menu items, sorry.

(I know this trick, obviously, and I still forget from time to time and eventually start wondering why my editing experience is so choppy on my 2018 MacBook Pro — then it hits me ).

Once you’ve exported your project to final, you can delete the proxies and other optimized/cached stuff, because they do take up space. Again, can’t remember the exact menu item, but it’s there. You can also just delete the related directory later.