Jerky playback

[jackpg]

Today I was flying with my son in Pa. I have the 2s and he has the mini pro. we were both in 4K video. When we were done for the day, we put our cards in my laptop. It is a Dell with an I-7 cpu. My video is jerky when viewing. His with the mini is very smooth. Once I edit and process video it plays perfect on laptop and tv. Any ideas as to why it is jerky?

 

[Solsearcher]

Today I was flying with my son in Pa. I have the 2s and he has the mini pro. we were both in 4K video. When we were done for the day, we put our cards in my laptop. It is a Dell with an I-7 cpu. My video is jerky when viewing. His with the mini is very smooth. Once I edit and process video it plays perfect on laptop and tv. Any ideas as to why it is jerky?

I have a Dell w/ i7 and 32 GB RAM. H.265 is choppy, H.264 is not. Could that be your issue?

 

[mavic3usa]

Also you may want to check your video media playback software, try to use VLC

 

[Dave Maine]

Smooth playback is very impacted by the CODEC and resolution chosen by the operator, and the hardware decoder on the pc, if it has one. Whiteout this information any advice will be pure speculation.

 

[James in the Desert]

Today I was flying with my son in Pa. I have the 2s and he has the mini pro. we were both in 4K video. When we were done for the day, we put our cards in my laptop. It is a Dell with an I-7 cpu. My video is jerky when viewing. His with the mini is very smooth. Once I edit and process video it plays perfect on laptop and tv. Any ideas as to why it is jerky?

it’s just pulling into much information at one time, but once it’s processed it wiill playback smoothly

 

[jackpg]

I have a Dell w/ i7 and 32 GB RAM. H.265 is choppy, H.264 is not. Could that be your issue?

Thanks so much. I changed to H264 and all is great.
Thanks again,
John

 

[Droning on and on...]

Thanks so much. I changed to H264 and all is great.
Thanks again,
John

Before you make this permanent, you might want to do a little research/ experimentation to see if some settings can fix it (like hardware acceleration) or a different codec, or player.

There just too many benefits to h.265 to abandon it easily.

 

[rwilliam99]

Before you make this permanent, you might want to do a little research/ experimentation to see if some settings can fix it (like hardware acceleration) or a different codec, or player.

There just too many benefits to h.265 to abandon it easily.

I've heard conflicting reports on this - I've read many people say use h.264 for compatibility, others say h.265 is much better. Can you list some of the benefits of h.265?

 

[Droning on and on...]

I've heard conflicting reports on this - I've read many people say use h.264 for compatibility, others say h.265 is much better. Can you list some of the benefits of h.265?

Much smaller file size with better quality. Read here

 

[jackpg]

not sure myself

 

[Solsearcher]

Much smaller file size with better quality. Read here

I think the vast majority of people would have trouble distinguishing between a 4k 264 and a 4k 265. Not saying this to stir up a wasp nest, just my honest opinion.

 

[Pallidin]

Good info here

 

[rwilliam99]

Much smaller file size with better quality. Read here

Interesting - just for yucks I re-encoded one my recent videos in h.265 and I have to say, the claim of much smaller file size didn't pan out. The file was only about 7% smaller. I can't say I saw a change in quality but I'm not a videophile, so....

 

[Droning on and on...]

Did you lower the bitrate?

 

[Solsearcher]

Also you may want to check your video media playback software, try to use VLC

My vids are choppy at 265 even playing on VLC. No issues w/ VLC and 264. I believe it has more to do with your GPU than CPU and RAM or even what media player you're using. In theory, an i7 w/ 32 GB RAM should be sufficient for 265, but nope.

 

[Droning on and on...]

My vids are choppy at 265 even playing on VLC. No issues w/ VLC and 264. I believe it has more to do with your GPU than CPU and RAM or even what media player you're using. In theory, an i7 w/ 32 GB RAM should be sufficient for 265, but nope.

Something's definitely wrong. I play 265 content on a 3 yo cell phone without issues.

Check in VLC to see specifically what codec it's using, and in particular if there's any configuration for hardware acceleration.

 

[Solsearcher]

Something's definitely wrong. I play 265 content on a 3 yo cell phone without issues.

Check in VLC to see specifically what codec it's using, and in particular if there's any configuration for hardware acceleration.

You could be right, and I'll check the VLC settings if I ever do another 265 video... but displaying a video on a "tiny" cell phone screen is not really a good comparison to one being displayed on a computer monitor.
I just don't see enough benefits to bother with 265. I'm not at all worried about file size, so that doesn't sway me. As far as "quality" of the video goes, I dunno about you, but my eyes just aren't sharp enough to tell the difference! (Depending where/how it's being watched, of course)

Edited to add - I think much depends on the application of the video (pun intended). If you're shooting vids to post on Youtube, I highly doubt you'll "see" any benefit with respect to quality. If you're streaming video from your own server, then yes, 265 makes more sense because broadcasting 4k in 264 uses 32 mbps. 265 in 4k uses only 15mbps. That is the only advantage I see...bandwidth.

Lastly, 265 uses 10x the CPU power that 264 does. My time is valuable, and I'd rather not wait the extra time for the encoding to finish.

For the record, I'm not saying don't use 265, or that it isn't preferred over 264 in some instances. I just don't think saying only use 265 is correct. (I know no one said that, but that's kinda the implication) I'd say "In some instances 265 is much better than 264, but for MOST applications, 264 is perfectly fine, and possibly even preferred over 265 in some cases.

 

[rwilliam99]

Did you lower the bitrate?

I used the same settings as the prior render, just changed the codec from h.264 to h.265. I used the "Auto" quality and looking at the details on each file, the h.265 file had a 2682kbps bitrate and the h.264 had a 2870kbps bitrate - so the h.265 is a slightly lower bitrate.

 

[MavicAir2Marc]

There are some frame rates and resolutions that you can only shoot H.265. Just be aware, if you use one of those (like 4K/60fps) , when you lower the resolution or frame rate, it will not go back to H.264. You have to go back into the settings and change it back to H.264 manually.

 

[Droning on and on...]

I used the same settings as the prior render, just changed the codec from h.264 to h.265. I used the "Auto" quality and looking at the details on each file, the h.265 file had a 2682kbps bitrate and the h.264 had a 2870kbps bitrate - so the h.265 is a slightly lower bitrate.

That's why you didn't see much difference in file size. You could probably cut the bitrate in half with 265 and get the same quality as the 264 encode.

Your reasons for not bothering with 265 are sound. Still one other consideration is that at some point the 264 files are going to start to nt be supported in newer software, and become a pain to deal with.

Years off, so not much of a concern now. However, the future for h.264 is the frustration people with old MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 experience trying to use that video in contemporary editors, especially mobile apps on tablets and smartphones.

Nothing to worry about now. Just a case for always using current technology if you can to preserve future use, and someone in that future keeping all their hair