H264 vs H265? (DaVinci eiditng)

[Bad Santa]

Is there an actual advantage to using H265 compression?
My drone is set to H265 compression and when I open it in DaVinci it shows the video isn't available.
Checking the interwebs and it appears that it's a graphic card (built in on my laptop) issue.
The solution being to mess around in the BIOS.
I used to build computers so messing around in the BIOS doesn't scare me but I have other programs (specifically SolidWorks) that had to have graphics set up and I don't want to mess with that.

I have a couple of 256Gb memory cards so I'm not worried about storage space.
So, is there an advantage to using H265?

 

[GFields]

Not in my opinion.

But, here's an article about it

 

[Bad Santa]

Not in my opinion.

But, here's an article about it

Interesting.
Just from reading that it appears that the bitrate is the "advantage" but as bandwidth increases, the advantage seems diminished.

 

[mavic3usa]

Not an expert in this area but I thought you needed the (paid) Studio version to properly deal with H.265 in DR, no?

 

[MavicAir2Marc]

Not an expert in this area but I thought you needed the (paid) Studio version to properly deal with H.265 in DR, no?

I think only on a PC, I believe the free Mac version will still run H.265 footage IIRC.

 

[anotherlab]

Is there an actual advantage to using H265 compression?
My drone is set to H265 compression and when I open it in DaVinci it shows the video isn't available.
Checking the interwebs and it appears that it's a graphic card (built in on my laptop) issue.
The solution being to mess around in the BIOS.
I used to build computers so messing around in the BIOS doesn't scare me but I have other programs (specifically SolidWorks) that had to have graphics set up and I don't want to mess with that.

I have a couple of 256Gb memory cards so I'm not worried about storage space.
So, is there an advantage to using H265?

If you are on Windows, have you tried installing the HEVC codec from the MS store? Higher-end graphics cards will have hardware support for H.265, but the software codec will work. This video shows how to do that and has some links.

You can also transcode H.265 to H.264 with VLC, FFMpeg, Handbrake, etc.

 

[dlfrederick1951]

Not an expert in this area but I thought you needed the (paid) Studio version to properly deal with H.265 in DR, no?

that's correct - only paid version supports h.265

 

[Bad Santa]

that's correct - only paid version supports h.265

Good to know.
I'll shoot in H264 going forward.

 

[tonyack]

If you are using Mac M1, H265 is preferred option in Davinci as M1 has native support and the work is much much faster with H265, especially the final render into H265.

 

[Bad Santa]

If you are using Mac M1, H265 is preferred option in Davinci as M1 has native support and the work is much much faster with H265, especially the final render into H265.

I'm sure someone will appreciate that information.
I, however, won't ever own a Mac. It's one of the few things in life I'm prejudicial about.

 

[Blexius]

Hi, besides the points already mentioned that set conditions depending on each hardware, keep in mind that H.264 is the current standard, and everything points to H.265 being the next one, so sooner or later, we’ll all be using it.
Best regards,

 

[anotherlab]

Hi, besides the points already mentioned that set conditions depending on each hardware, keep in mind that H.264 is the current standard, and everything points to H.265 being the next one, so sooner or later, we’ll all be using it.
Best regards,

They are both current standards. H.265 is a newer standard and requires better hardware than .264.

 

[ryguy80]

H.265 is a more efficient codec. It can reduce the file size while maintaining the same video quality.

 

[VenomXts]

H.265 is a more efficient codec. It can reduce the file size while maintaining the same video quality.

This is the correct answer smaller file size but you need a more powerful machine to deal with it both encoding and decoding.

 

[ryguy80]

This is the correct answer smaller file size but you need a more powerful machine to deal with it both encoding and decoding.

Good point on needing a beefer machine to do the editing with H.265.

 

[rwilliam99]

Good point on needing a beefer machine to do the editing with H.265.

Its not just the editing - it is the viewing of the rendered videos as well. That is why I've heard quite a few people advise using H.264, otherwise you risk people with slower/older devices not being able to view them properly.

 

[mavic3usa]

^I think once you upload to YouTube, it's not going to matter to the different computers out there if it's h264 or h265; yt will re-encode and compress the way I understand it. slow devices can choose 1080p or 720p if they need to.

if nobody gets your mkv or mp4 file, not going to matter much.

 

[ryguy80]

^I think once you upload to YouTube, it's not going to matter to the different computers out there if it's h264 or h265; yt will re-encode and compress the way I understand it. slow devices can choose 1080p or 720p if they need to.

if nobody gets your mkv or mp4 file, not going to matter much.

YouTube encodes in VP9, so yes, whether it's H.264 or H.265 is irrelevant if viewing a stream on YouTube. It's getting the video to render in H.264 or H.265 before uploading to YouTube that the computer hardware comes into play.

 

[VenomXts]

The simple fact is if you have the processing/gpu power .265 makes sense to save so as to have smaller files, if not .264 is more widely supported but bigger. it really depends on use case, i sometimes encode to both because certain places wont accept .265 still and certain devices wont play it...