How come DJI made a video about the P4 showing H.264 being worse?  I've ran a test myself w/ the Mavic 2 and H.264 looks better than H.265 as the details in the trees are better.  In the spec sheet it shows the H.264 having More bitrate.  Which is really better?

For 99% of folks H.264 is plenty good enough imho. Also easier for your Hardware to handle in PP.

I only use H.264 as my Mac isn't powerful enough to handle H.265

*DM* Posted at 6-8 01:47
For 99% of folks H.264 is plenty good enough imho. Also easier for your Hardware to handle in PP.

I agree H.264 is plenty good enough.

However, I personally use H.265 with 40gb of RAM in FCP on IMac with no issues.
https://www.boxcast.com/blog/hev ... hats-the-difference

KEJ Posted at 6-12 05:03
I agree H.264 is plenty good enough.

However, I personally use H.265 with 40gb of RAM in FCP on IMac with no issues.

The only real benefit of HEVC H.265 is storage savings.  It Cripples performance.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-12 11:05
The only real benefit of HEVC H.265 is storage savings.  It Cripples performance.

"It Cripples performance."

Of what ?

AntDX316 Posted at 6-12 11:05
The only real benefit of HEVC H.265 is storage savings.  It Cripples performance.

Doesn't the more modern codec double the video bit rate?

Aardvark Posted at 6-12 11:53
"It Cripples performance."

Of what ?

Exactly! He is full of these silly unsubstantiated claims.

From what i can make out from 2 sources ive looked at and that is, its better for use in live streaming due to the size and it has better contrast compared with h.264.
I am sure my old lappy couldnt work with h.256 for some reason, or it could be the one im on now, i cant remember, or, it could have been the version of AP i use :/

AntDX316 Posted at 6-12 11:05
The only real benefit of HEVC H.265 is storage savings.  It Cripples performance.

Possibly time to upgrade your hardware or add more resources like memory.

KEJ Posted at 6-12 22:42
Possibly time to upgrade your hardware or add more resources like memory.

I have 32GB of RAM, i7-2699V3, 2080 Ti FTW3 Ultra, Intel 750 NVMe, X99, etc.

Aardvark Posted at 6-12 11:53
"It Cripples performance."

Of what ?

The drone cannot do C4K60fps at H.265, only H.264 (Please refer to post #1).  Also, only H.264 it renders way smoother than HEVC when both are set to 240Mbps bit rate CBR.  My PC could not cancel and close Premiere or AE when it was rendering that high.
I find 240Mbps CBR, maximum rendering quality, maximum depth, at H.264 is the only way to get the Highest quality out of the render (because rendering through Premiere to clip then again in AE to overlay (the quality is the Highest straight off the drone (double compressions by rendering Twice)) w/o the 2GB file final rendering at 50GB+ w/ other codecs.  I have not experimented using All the codecs but I've tried some.

I mean, it's probably better to just skip Premiere and clip through AE?  I haven't tried it yet.

AJC-W Posted at 6-12 12:29
Doesn't the more modern codec double the video bit rate?

If I'm on 100Mbps CBR at H.265 it's eq. to 200Mbps of H.264??

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 00:51
If I'm on 100Mbps CBR at H.265 it's eq. to 200Mbps of H.264??

I believe so

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 00:53
I believe so

I've just tested rendering at the max available to select CBR 40Mbps on H.265.  It takes like 35 minutes.  On CBR 81Mbps on H.264 it takes around 23.  On H.264 with CBR 240Mbps it takes around 11.  Also, I cannot blade clip in AE.  Only Premiere.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:03
I've just tested rendering at the max CBR 40Mbps on H.265.  It takes like 30+ minutes.  On CBR 81Mbps on H.264 it takes around 18.  On H.264 with CBR 240Mbps it takes around 10.  Also, I cannot clip in AE.  Only Premiere.

Surely CTU's are more effective than macro blocks. CTU can process as many as 64x64 blocks compared the H.264 is limited to 4x4 to 16x16 blocks. HEVC compresses information far more efficiently.

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:09
Surely CTU's are more effective than macro blocks. CTU can process as many as 64x64 blocks compared the H.264 is limited to 4x4 to 16x16 blocks. HEVC compresses information far more efficiently.

Sure, but at the cost of a longer rendering time and higher demand for recording power.  Maybe my CPU does not have the instructions to render H.265 properly.  Maybe you need an X299 or better.  Maybe an i9.  I don't have one so I have no idea.  Maybe you need Optane too.  Maybe you need another accelerator to make it happen.  Perhaps it would work if you have all the Nvidia Tesla GPUs that the budget of Pixar has so they can save More money for this to work but all I have is what I've listed.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:11
Sure, but at the cost of a longer rendering time and higher demand for recording power.

That's like saying 4K is worse than 1080p because it takes up more storage. Yes, H.265 needs far more processing power and takes longer but the result is superior.

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:12
That's like saying 4K is worse than 1080p because it takes up more storage. Yes, H.265 needs far more processing power and takes longer but the result is superior.

The result is superior in terms of storage savings but in terms of quality..  I lost tree detail in H.265 vs H.264.  I think looking at things too technical can really overshadow the actual results.  This is why I like to look backwards from where it is rather than looking bottom to the top.  Of course, in all areas of life this is bad but in this area it's good.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:14
The result is superior in terms of storage savings but in terms of quality..  I lost tree detail in H.265 vs H.264.  I think looking at things too technical can really overshadow the actual results.  This is why I like to look backwards from where it is rather than looking bottom to the top.  Of course, in all areas of life this is bad but in this area it's good.

Perhaps you should experiment a little more as H.265 is clearly a superior codec.

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:17
Perhaps you should experiment a little more as H.265 is clearly a superior codec.

Perhaps you should really read what I'm trying to say.  H.265 is great in storage savings but it takes a lot of power to figure out where the savings can happen.  Maybe if I'm not shooting in 60fps but 24 and 29.92 it would be ok but I really prefer 60fps over 30k no matter what.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:19
Perhaps you should really read what I'm trying to say.  H.265 is great in storage savings but it takes a lot of power to figure out where the savings can happen.

I have read what you have written hence my ability to reply directly to it. Your findings are flawed - simple as that.

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:20
I have read what you have written hence my ability to reply directly to it. Your findings are flawed - simple as that.

How are my findings flawed though?  Do you even know how these things even work?  Codes are like calculation algorithms, all to save storage.  The HEVC takes Way more power and time to render than H.264.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:21
How are my findings flawed though?  Do you even know how these things even work?

I think it is damn obvious I know a lot more about this entire hobby than you sunshine - not just codecs which you obviously don't have a clue about.
AND STOP AMENDING YOUR POSTS AFTER REPLYING...

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:22
I think it is damn obvious I know a lot more about this entire hobby than you sunshine - not just codecs which you obviously don't have a clue about.

With all due respect, You are super ignorant about how codecs even work lmao.  All you do is snapshot pictures and upload vids but you probably have Zero idea on how post-processing actually works.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:22
With all due respect, You are super ignorant about how codecs even work lmao.  All you do is snapshot pictures and upload vids but you probably have Zero idea on how to post-process.

You're just a kid with toys beyond your intellectual capacity - thats why you ask the most basic questions and have lost all credibility on this forum. Good bye.

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:27
You're just a kid with toys beyond your intellectual capacity - thats why you ask the most basic questions and have lost all credibility on this forum. Good bye.

Can we just look at the actual data rather than making who used to be right as emotionally deep as a religion to die for?

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:30
Can we just look at the actual data rather than making who used to be right as emotionally deep as a religion to die for?

clear, clear

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:32
clear, clear

Being ignorant is what keeps mental peace even if you are Totally wrong.   Being wrong is ok until you had to get stuff done that was more important but couldn't because you got tied up w/ inefficient methods.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:34
Being ignorant is what keeps mental peace even if you are Totally wrong.

I'm totally right

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:34
I'm totally right

Having flaws remain is the usual result of when big things go wrong in life.  It's ok to be wrong in certain areas of life.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:36
Having flaws remain is the usual result of when big things go wrong in life.  It's ok to be wrong in certain areas of life.

Glad you finally admit you're wrong

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:37
Glad you finally admit you're wrong

One day, AI will give everybody all the answers this way no one can blame anything but until then, arguments will continue to persist.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:38
One day, AI will give everybody all the answers this way no one can blame anything but until then, arguments will continue to persist.

I'm not arguing - I'm telling you that H.265 produces superior quality footage. Everyone who knows anything about codecs will concur. Just because you don't know how to edit effectively and a 'tree' didn't look as nice does not qualify you to state otherwise lmfao

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:41
I'm not arguing - I'm telling you that H.265 produces superior quality footage. Everyone who knows anything about codecs will concur. Just because you don't know how to edit effectively and a 'tree' didn't look as nice does not qualify you to be state otherwise lmfao

It produces superior quality footage because the people testing them have probably botched the footage.  I've ran my Own test and find H.264 to be Superior over H.265 on the DJIs at least, on the Mavic 2 Zoom at least.. I haven't run it on the Phantom 4 but I will when the weather permits and upload the vid ok? : )  This way we can squash all doubt.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:42
It produces superior quality footage because the people testing them have probably botched the footage.  I ran my Own test and find H.264 to be Superior over H.265 on the DJIs at least, on the Mavic 2 Zoom at least.. I haven't ran it on the Phantom 4 but I will when the weather permits and upload the vid ok? : )

Nothing has been botched.

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:43
Nothing has been botched.

Did you run the test?  People can botch w/e they want and make You believe it.

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:41
I'm not arguing - I'm telling you that H.265 produces superior quality footage. Everyone who knows anything about codecs will concur. Just because you don't know how to edit effectively and a 'tree' didn't look as nice does not qualify you to state otherwise lmfao

I edited nothing.  It was straight off the drone.  I was examining the footage myself before I got the P4.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-13 03:44
Did you run the test?  People can botch w/e they want and make You believe it.

Yes, H.265 looks great when I used my old mans iMac - took forever and not something I will use frequently as my own computer can't handle it but the results of H.265 are clearly different. May also be due to my M2P recording in 10-bit rather than just 8-bit as your drones do when using H.265.

AJC-W Posted at 6-13 03:41
I'm not arguing - I'm telling you that H.265 produces superior quality footage. Everyone who knows anything about codecs will concur. Just because you don't know how to edit effectively and a 'tree' didn't look as nice does not qualify you to state otherwise lmfao

Totally agree.