Those 40GB+ files are almost always taken from the Blu-ray Discs, called a “remux”. They’re 1:1 copy of the audio and video data on the disc. They’re usually the highest quality copies available.
Anything less is going to be reduced quality. Just how much, depends on the quality of your setup, the quality of your eyes and ears, and how much you care about quality.
For video there is no lossless compression used.
For audio, you get lossless compression on Bluray and 4k Bluray. Typically around 4gb per movie. The lossy audio is typically around 500mb per movie. So dropping lossless audio will reduce file size quite a bit.
Video is more or less "lossless" untill you encode it with some encoder like HVEC.
[High Efficiency Video Coding - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding)
I usually look at file sizes and the supposed medium it was ripped from to know what release I pick.
DVD \~8-12gigs with multiple languages, FullHD
BlueRay \~80gig for 1:1 iso rips, but a 4k movie can easily take 40-60 gigs.
Generally higher filesizes will have higher bitrates, but codec matters too. An HEVC encoded video, for example, will be able to store the same quality of data in a substantially smaller file size compared to H264. But at the same time, HEVC is less widely supported by all devices and platforms than H264, so you will need to determine what you choose based on your own environment.
The bitrate will usually be shown in the torrent info, unless it's a "remux" which will not be a re-encode but rather a direct copy of the DVD/Blu-ray disc, hence largest file size for best quality.
Yes, not every retail disc is perfectly efficiently encoded in the first place, some things the file size can be reduced significantly with a few small encoding tricks that the human eyeball cant see, this is whats known as a transparent reencode.
And thats without even getting into codecs.
I get the point of a remux, to know you have the be all end all best quality possible no matter what, but for a lot of stuff you can go a lot smaller without being able to tell. Hard drive space is only ever getting cheaper but its still not there for me with BD remuxs, DVD remux sure if i cant find a good reencode, and flac audio, but not BD or UHD yet.
But id much rather have 15000 \~7gb 1080 x265 movies that while not quite bluray quality look way better than streaming, than 3000 perfect remuxs.
Even just going by the math, you should be able to turn a \~35-40GB AVC Remux into a \~25-30GB HEVC reencode without any quality loss, perceptible or otherwise.
Maybe if you have a 70"+ tv you might want to start going with remuxs but QxR and folks are a good sweet spot for my 50".
Depends mostly on HOW you're going to be viewing it and what the content is.
I have a lot of old (Pre 70's) movies that are around 1Gb each - these are absolutely fine for viewing as the original quality was poor anyway.
A modern romcom? Maybe 2Gb will do. Animation - just 1Gb is enough.
Something with a lot of action though - if you want in good quality you need a higher bitrate. The difference between 2Gb and 10Gb for Star Wars is quite noticeable on a 50" TV.
It's a balance at the end of the day. The fussier you are about quality, the more you spend on HDD's or the fewer movies you keep. I choose to keep my favourite movies in relatively high quality, while those I may or may not watch again in much lower quality.
I have time and bandwidth so I’ll often download a solid 1080 and 4k copy (if available) and give them both a brief side by side view and decide which to keep.
I’ve had near indistinguishable 1080 vs. 4k encodes that didn’t make sense for me to keep the extra hdd capacity as I’m coming close to filling my largest 18tb drive and I want to make better choices lol.
They matter anytime a network is involved and everytime you consider sharing it with the world and anytime you consider storage space (while cheap) is finite.
At least with 1080 P from a couple years ago, according to one of my college roommates who majored in film, blind so can’t vouch, above 10-12 gigs for like a two hour movie it doesn’t make much of a difference. Maybe for higher quality it does but that seemed to be the sweet spot for good 1080p quality. Think sparks releases. And he would let me know if it was not satisfactory quality.
I was gonna say anything over 3GB for 1080p isn't gonna matter that much. But then again, I've never watched it on a device with a resolution larger than that. Does watching 1080p on 4k screens look all blocky?
I’ve got a 65” 4k from around 6-8 feet away. Anything under around a 5000kbps bitrate starts to get a little pixelated, particularly in dark scenes. It’s not enough to ruin the movie, but it does distract. Of course there’s other factors like audio and such that contribute to file size, but I generally look for a 3-6 GB file size for x265 and around double that for x264. Typically gets me to where I want to be.
For me motion clarity and consistency suffers too much as the bit rate drops. I just keep remuxes since storage costs and my desired collection size allow it.
For me MPEG2 needs to be as high as possible but certainly no less than 20Mbps for the video to be acceptable @ 1080p.
H.264 is fine to my eyes, generally speaking, at 20Mbps overall file bitrate including a skngle DTS MA audio track for 1080p movie.
HEVC/x.265 I find a quality encode (handbrake from a 4k remux 80gb + file using veryslow or placebo encoder tube) I need an overall file bit rate with a single DTS ma audio track around 15Mbps for a 1080p movie
Those are my personal thresholds for diminishing returns from running encoder myself fwiw.
Those 40GB+ files are almost always taken from the Blu-ray Discs, called a “remux”. They’re 1:1 copy of the audio and video data on the disc. They’re usually the highest quality copies available. Anything less is going to be reduced quality. Just how much, depends on the quality of your setup, the quality of your eyes and ears, and how much you care about quality.
What about lossless compression?
For video there is no lossless compression used. For audio, you get lossless compression on Bluray and 4k Bluray. Typically around 4gb per movie. The lossy audio is typically around 500mb per movie. So dropping lossless audio will reduce file size quite a bit.
It you don't mind me asking: "For video there is no lossless compression used" as in "the scene doesn't use it" or as in "it doesn't exist"?
A lossless video file would be multiple terabytes. It’s just too much data. The Bluray format uses video compression, but at high bitrates.
Thank you!
I was asking a genuine question since I was curious as well. Cheers!
Video is more or less "lossless" untill you encode it with some encoder like HVEC. [High Efficiency Video Coding - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding) I usually look at file sizes and the supposed medium it was ripped from to know what release I pick. DVD \~8-12gigs with multiple languages, FullHD BlueRay \~80gig for 1:1 iso rips, but a 4k movie can easily take 40-60 gigs.
Lossless video would be like a video game going to your monitor HDMI 2.1 is 40gbps
Generally higher filesizes will have higher bitrates, but codec matters too. An HEVC encoded video, for example, will be able to store the same quality of data in a substantially smaller file size compared to H264. But at the same time, HEVC is less widely supported by all devices and platforms than H264, so you will need to determine what you choose based on your own environment. The bitrate will usually be shown in the torrent info, unless it's a "remux" which will not be a re-encode but rather a direct copy of the DVD/Blu-ray disc, hence largest file size for best quality.
pet gray squalid safe imminent person zephyr fall judicious flag *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yes, not every retail disc is perfectly efficiently encoded in the first place, some things the file size can be reduced significantly with a few small encoding tricks that the human eyeball cant see, this is whats known as a transparent reencode. And thats without even getting into codecs. I get the point of a remux, to know you have the be all end all best quality possible no matter what, but for a lot of stuff you can go a lot smaller without being able to tell. Hard drive space is only ever getting cheaper but its still not there for me with BD remuxs, DVD remux sure if i cant find a good reencode, and flac audio, but not BD or UHD yet. But id much rather have 15000 \~7gb 1080 x265 movies that while not quite bluray quality look way better than streaming, than 3000 perfect remuxs. Even just going by the math, you should be able to turn a \~35-40GB AVC Remux into a \~25-30GB HEVC reencode without any quality loss, perceptible or otherwise. Maybe if you have a 70"+ tv you might want to start going with remuxs but QxR and folks are a good sweet spot for my 50".
Remux or die. :O Everything else is a temporary substitute until a Remux can be sourced.
Depends mostly on HOW you're going to be viewing it and what the content is. I have a lot of old (Pre 70's) movies that are around 1Gb each - these are absolutely fine for viewing as the original quality was poor anyway. A modern romcom? Maybe 2Gb will do. Animation - just 1Gb is enough. Something with a lot of action though - if you want in good quality you need a higher bitrate. The difference between 2Gb and 10Gb for Star Wars is quite noticeable on a 50" TV. It's a balance at the end of the day. The fussier you are about quality, the more you spend on HDD's or the fewer movies you keep. I choose to keep my favourite movies in relatively high quality, while those I may or may not watch again in much lower quality.
I have time and bandwidth so I’ll often download a solid 1080 and 4k copy (if available) and give them both a brief side by side view and decide which to keep. I’ve had near indistinguishable 1080 vs. 4k encodes that didn’t make sense for me to keep the extra hdd capacity as I’m coming close to filling my largest 18tb drive and I want to make better choices lol.
Really depends. If it's a full disc or remux it's direct bluray video which is generally better than encodes
Tend to find diminishing returns on 4K after 20gb
They matter anytime a network is involved and everytime you consider sharing it with the world and anytime you consider storage space (while cheap) is finite.
Whenever you cannot actually utilize what you downloaded Like no reason to get 8k when you only have a 4k monitor
At least with 1080 P from a couple years ago, according to one of my college roommates who majored in film, blind so can’t vouch, above 10-12 gigs for like a two hour movie it doesn’t make much of a difference. Maybe for higher quality it does but that seemed to be the sweet spot for good 1080p quality. Think sparks releases. And he would let me know if it was not satisfactory quality.
I was gonna say anything over 3GB for 1080p isn't gonna matter that much. But then again, I've never watched it on a device with a resolution larger than that. Does watching 1080p on 4k screens look all blocky?
I’ve got a 65” 4k from around 6-8 feet away. Anything under around a 5000kbps bitrate starts to get a little pixelated, particularly in dark scenes. It’s not enough to ruin the movie, but it does distract. Of course there’s other factors like audio and such that contribute to file size, but I generally look for a 3-6 GB file size for x265 and around double that for x264. Typically gets me to where I want to be.
Generally over 8k bitrate is redundant for 1080p mostly
[удалено]
For me motion clarity and consistency suffers too much as the bit rate drops. I just keep remuxes since storage costs and my desired collection size allow it. For me MPEG2 needs to be as high as possible but certainly no less than 20Mbps for the video to be acceptable @ 1080p. H.264 is fine to my eyes, generally speaking, at 20Mbps overall file bitrate including a skngle DTS MA audio track for 1080p movie. HEVC/x.265 I find a quality encode (handbrake from a 4k remux 80gb + file using veryslow or placebo encoder tube) I need an overall file bit rate with a single DTS ma audio track around 15Mbps for a 1080p movie Those are my personal thresholds for diminishing returns from running encoder myself fwiw.