post #2227265
547 1.2k 11 E

Mairo

Former Staff

gentlepuppet said:
What about this?

How about no?
I'm actually legit angry about these. Only thing worse I have seen is one instructing renaming file extension.
It would definitely make what I do easier to just forward everyone to random online converter to press one button :V

andre_galaxy said:
do you know a tool that i can use to transform the vids into webms wihtout loosing quality? cause i been using a page for that since i got here

You still didn't exactly answer my question, considering the problem I'm mentioning is also present on MP4 in catbox link on twitter, which in extend means there's possibly other problems than just webm encoding in your workflow which you might want to check upon.

If by page you mean online converters, then for the love of god why is everyone using online converter!?! Stop that! You clearly aren't using that for MP4 so why for WebM?

These sites suck because they are meant to make it so that you can convert that one video file to format which just works on your schools windows XP computer and windows media player and you do not care about quality as long as it plays. Additionally many of these webpages because of this focus, they hide crusial fine tuning options, force specific codecs, are filled with ads and use extremely fast settings so that you get the file ASAP rather than getting a good file. Also because they are online, you are forced to already lossy file like MP4 instead of source file like PNG image sequence or lossless AVI, further decreasing the quality. They can also default to stuff like constant bitrate mode, which means that small and simple videos turn out fine looking, but when you increase resolution, framerate and complexity, suddenly it looks like horrible mess.

Meanwhile e621 tries to host the animations in format that is as close to original quality as possible, which means just because it works and is accepted, doesn't make it good and will be replaced. We can't exactly host the original lossless AVI files here, so there are still some drawbacks, but at least we can do webm now where earlier we were stuck with flash, which meant a lot of 240p flash conversions in past. With images this is easy, use PNG, that's it.

- - - - -

I use ffmpeg for almost everything, because I need to have fine tuning, know exactly what's going on and need to handle all of the formats including WebM, APNG, GIF, MP4, etc.
Extremely good VP9 encoding guide: https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/Encode/VP9
My default commands, which is two CRF 16 with no audio:

ffmpeg -y -i input.avi - 1 -deadline best -c:v libvpx-vp9 -pix_fmt yuv420p -crf 16 -b:v 0 -an -f webm NUL
ffmpeg -i input.avi - 2 -metadata title="CHANGE THIS" -metadata url="CHANGE THIS" -deadline best -c:v libvpx-vp9 -pix_fmt yuv420p -crf 16 -b:v 0 -an output.webm

You usually want to aim for visually lossless or "transparent" quality, meaning that if regular viewer is normally watching the video, they cannot see any difference even in close watching proximity. This is why constant quality mode is better from constant bitrate as you don't have to redo the encode multiple times to see if it looks good. There are values thrown online what this is, commonly see values around 18-22, my own testing I keep it generally around 12-18 (lower value = better quality, higher bitrate/filesize).

If you already have Adobe CC, that includes media transcoder which you can also utilize. If you don't know how to use command line tools, there are frontends to ffmpeg including WebM for retards and XMedia recode I have seen being used with some other options out there (VLC and HandBrake I have seen breaking stuff though).

  • |
  • 4