Converting MKVs to MP4: Would This Decrease File Size?
-
MKV is still used a lot - it's a more versatile container.
-
What makes one container better than another?
-
-
Compatibility, especially cross-platform, I'm guessing.
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
Compatibility, especially cross-platform, I'm guessing.
I'd like a bit more information than that..
-
Compatibility. Mp4 is more compatbible. Almost all non theather release deliverables are done in the mp4 wrapper. The only down side is it requires a licsence to use it. Mkv is open source but not well adopted.
-
MKV is pretty well adopted in piracy circles
-
@Nic said:
MKV is pretty well adopted in piracy circles
So now we know where AJ got these torrent-ed files..
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Nic said:
MKV is pretty well adopted in piracy circles
So now we know where AJ got these torrent-ed files..
Already known as he has posted about it blatantly more than once.
-
@Nic said:
MKV is pretty well adopted in piracy circles
I've gotten MKVs from some legitimate sources... but since it is a FOSS alternative it is being used to package a lot of pirated media.
-
I answered this on Spiceworks already, but for the sake of cross posting since you did, I will say again: get a new drive, lowering quality is always a terrible idea, you can't go from lossy to lossy without destroying quality.
-
-
@tonyshowoff said:
I answered this on Spiceworks already, but for the sake of cross posting since you did, I will say again: get a new drive, lowering quality is always a terrible idea, you can't go from lossy to lossy without destroying quality.
More like brutally destroying the quality.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Nic said:
MKV is pretty well adopted in piracy circles
So now we know where AJ got these torrent-ed files..
Not denying nor admitting to anything...
-
Bigger drive is definitely the better answer. Not free, but drive space is pretty cheap and a permanent solution. Doing handbreak work requires a tremendous amount of disk and CPU resources. I've done this a lot for my own movie collection compression and the amount of time and effort that it takes is absolutely crazy.
-
@tonyshowoff said:
I answered this on Spiceworks already, but for the sake of cross posting since you did, I will say again: get a new drive, lowering quality is always a terrible idea, you can't go from lossy to lossy without destroying quality.
You did? I don't see the response, unless I'm just not recognizing your handle over there.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@tonyshowoff said:
I answered this on Spiceworks already, but for the sake of cross posting since you did, I will say again: get a new drive, lowering quality is always a terrible idea, you can't go from lossy to lossy without destroying quality.
More like brutally destroying the quality.
Especially considering the source. They likely have been transcoded a few times already.
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
@tonyshowoff said:
I answered this on Spiceworks already, but for the sake of cross posting since you did, I will say again: get a new drive, lowering quality is always a terrible idea, you can't go from lossy to lossy without destroying quality.
You did? I don't see the response, unless I'm just not recognizing your handle over there.
Then you didn't read the content of them.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Bigger drive is definitely the better answer. Not free, but drive space is pretty cheap and a permanent solution. Doing handbreak work requires a tremendous amount of disk and CPU resources. I've done this a lot for my own movie collection compression and the amount of time and effort that it takes is absolutely crazy.
I have a non-NAS external drive I ordered a power cord for. The original got lost somehow. I'm going to network it via the USB port on the other NAS, as I have a WD MyPassport (500GB) being used by the main NAS. I think the Seagate GoFlex that I'm doing this with is 2TB, but it may be 3. It'll be a good landing platform for the compressed/multi-archive downloads I get that I then extract onto the final destination.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@tonyshowoff said:
I answered this on Spiceworks already, but for the sake of cross posting since you did, I will say again: get a new drive, lowering quality is always a terrible idea, you can't go from lossy to lossy without destroying quality.
You did? I don't see the response, unless I'm just not recognizing your handle over there.
Then you didn't read the content of them.
I did. But he's Tony over here and Antal? over there...I think.
