Video file size of H.264 vs H.265

[Robert Granata]

I don't pretend to know much of anything about codecs, but I read where H.265 compresses the files by about 30% more than H.264. When I look at the files right off of the sd card both the H.264 and H.265 files are approx. 3.67 gigs and about 4 minutes 50 seconds long. Shouldn't 3.67 gigs of H.265 give a longer video than 3.67 gigs of H.264 if it has better compression?

 

[Kilrah]

30% improvement means you can do 30% smaller file for same quality, or 30% better quality for same size (approximation obviously). It does the latter.

 

[Robert Granata]

30% improvement means you can do 30% smaller file for same quality, or 30% better quality for same size (approximation obviously). It does the latter.

I guess it's my untrained eye, but I don't see any difference in quality using normal color mode (only mode in both codecs) between H.264 and H.265. I would think a 30% increase in quality would be visually obvious.

 

[BD0G]

The codecs use compression algorithms that typically have to do alot more processing and compression on areas of the video that are not the same pixels (i.e. fast motion where all pixels are constantly changing) so I would scale up the H.265 and view an area of the video that has lots of motion and constantly changing pixels. Then do the same with the H.264 video and view the same or similar video clips. If you were just hovering or moving slowly the video will look nearly identical as there is no need to re-encode pixels that have not changed.

 

[Fearless Flight]

What is everyone using?

 

[Robert Granata]

The codecs use compression algorithms that typically have to do alot more processing and compression on areas of the video that are not the same pixels (i.e. fast motion where all pixels are constantly changing) so I would scale up the H.265 and view an area of the video that has lots of motion and constantly changing pixels. Then do the same with the H.264 video and view the same or similar video clips. If you were just hovering or moving slowly the video will look nearly identical as there is no need to re-encode pixels that have not changed.

I have no doubt that you're right, but I just tried it by flying rapidly past the same tree 90 degrees to my course (so I'm looking sideways in the direction of the tree) using both codecs and zooming the original 4k to 1080. My 61 year old eyes can't make out any difference. Should the leaves be clearer and more defined in the H.265? Because, to me, they look just as smeared in both.

 

[BD0G]

Good Question! I dont have a good answer. Since the file sizes are smaller using the H.265 codec then there is information that is not being included in the file that H.264 encoding would include. OR the information is being captured , but the codec does a more efficient job at understanding what to discard and not affect the video clarity and definition.

"Conceived to boost video streaming, High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), or H.265, is a video compression standard designed to substantially improve coding efficiency when compared to its precedent, the Advanced Video Coding (AVC), orH.264.Jun 8, 2016 "

 

[Robert Granata]

Good Question! I dont have a good answer. Since the file sizes are smaller using the H.265 codec then there is information that is not being included in the file that H.264 encoding would include. OR the information is being captured , but the codec does a more efficient job at understanding what to discard and not affect the video clarity and definition.

"Conceived to boost video streaming, High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), or H.265, is a video compression standard designed to substantially improve coding efficiency when compared to its precedent, the Advanced Video Coding (AVC), orH.264.Jun 8, 2016 "

That's what I don't understand. How could it boost video streaming when the files are (basically) the exact the same size?

 

[SteelFlyer]

Comparing codecs is tricky business because it depends a lot on what is being filmed, how uniform it is, how much motion, etc.. You will tend to see a greater difference when the image is very complicated and there is a good deal of motion. Static shots or ones with very uniform objects will show much less difference. There are some very good YouTube videos showing differences in H.264 and HEVC (H.265) encoding.

 

[Robert Granata]

Comparing codecs is tricky business because it depends a lot on what is being filmed, how uniform it is, how much motion, etc.. You will tend to see a greater difference when the image is very complicated and there is a good deal of motion. Static shots or ones with very uniform objects will show much less difference. There are some very good YouTube videos showing differences in H.264 and HEVC (H.265) encoding.

I did the tree with lots of leaves flyby to test just that. I can't see any difference in quality or clarity between the H.264 and H.265. Does anyone see a difference in quality between the two codecs, in Normal mode, on the Mavic 2 series? Can you look at a video recorded in Normal on the Mavic 2 and say "Oh, that's definitely H.265, because look at the..."?

 

[Roamer105]

I guess it's my untrained eye, but I don't see any difference in quality using normal color mode (only mode in both codecs) between H.264 and H.265. I would think a 30% increase in quality would be visually obvious.

Got it right: untrained eye. You can see a difference in certain very challenging (for the encoder) situations. But for the most part they are subtle enough. Don’t forget that if you encode in 10-bits... the 30% improvement is consumed by that already.

 

[Pisushax]

You know where is the problem where you cant find the difference.??
Bitrates
Since your camera set to a constant amount of bitrate no matter what codec it uses the final file size are the same and becouse the bitrate is so high there is no visual difference between h264 and h265
In your case your camera set to record at about 100mbps which yields about 3.67 gigabyte of files in 290 seconds so basically your video is rarly compresed
What a codec does is compressing a video when it has plenty of room to do what ever it wants there will be no compression so no difference between them
if you want to see real difference lower bitrate to about 10mbps so your files would be about 400 megabytes then you will definitely see visual difference between h265 and h264 assuming you are recoding in 4k

 

[SCAMBO-1]

Lots of video editing software companies are avoiding supporting h.265 due to the excessive licensing fee being charged for the privilege of being able to build it into their software, sad situation for sure as h.265 is quite good in my experience

 

[vjpapa]

PSNR(peak signal-to-noise ratio) in some captures can be larger in H.264, thus producing a slightly more detailed image. So it appears that H.265 will out perform H.264 in most captures but not always. ​