HandBrake 1.0 OSS Video Transcoder Released: VP9 & Opus Support

[Min1123]

I hate how the use of h265 proliferates even though it is poorly supported by hardware and software. I've ended up transcoding h265 -> h264 for Chromecast support a few times.

While I love the smaller files and the better quality, I have to agree that h265 isn't ready for primetime, even if x265 is (minus software patents). I had been hoping that VP9 would step in and take a good spot, but holy crap is it slow on modern machines (need more cores, LOTS more). That going on has given me hope for AOM, but the bitstream is still changing. Most of my hope for AOM isn't in that it's even slower than VP9 right now (they haven't finalized the bitstream, though it's supposed to be soon), but in that a ton of high profile companies are supporting it as the next WEBM supported video codec.

Then of course new hardware because it's incompatible with everything, even moreso than h265.

[SirMaster]

I stopped updating my handbrake at version 10.3 because in 10.5 (there was no 10.4) they removed the FDK AAC encoder which is the best AAC encoder out there. The libav AAC encoder they use now is still noticeably inferior. I need AAC encoding for audio as I use handbrake to encode everything for my iOS devices where I downmix surround sound to stereo and AAC is the best out there that goes well with H264 in an MP4 container for iOS devices. I refuse to use libav encoder when fdkaac is superior.

[DanL]

I stopped updating my handbrake at version 10.3 because in 10.5 (there was no 10.4) they removed the FDK AAC encoder

You can still build your own version with:

./configure --enable-fdk-aac

[timofonic]

That should kill it.

I would hope that!

Unfotunately, VidCoder offers a lot better configurability and GUI improvements HandBrake lacks.

I have my doubts about HandBrake surpassing VidCoder by all these advantages, I think the project has a too established GUI and not going to innovate in that aspect of the project.

.NET is the new Java, lots of bad programmers but amazing UI designers are going to use it. On the other end, good programmers use C/C++ but sucks at UI designing

[RickXy]

I am delighted to read the 1.0 announcement for HandBrake. Keep up the great work.

[ldo17]

I never understood the point of HandBrake. FFmpeg does everything it does, and more.

[Luke]

<snip>I hate how the use of h265 proliferates even though it is poorly supported by hardware and software. I've ended up transcoding h265 -> h264 for Chromecast support a few times.

I refuse to release videos in H265 because the owners of the corporate version of the codec are far more aggressive than MPEG-LA is with H264. Anyone reposting your video as the original file could be harassed for license fees, even if you yourself are beyond reach due to nationality, no assets, or a website managed via Tor. Yes, it's OK for sending to someone like Youtube that has all the licenses (and re-encodes everything anyway) but not when you send up the file directly. Due to this threat I won't encode to H265, and I have yet to encounter a news video I needed that was encoded in it by someone else.

On top of all else, if I used H265 to get the bandwidth of 1080p down to a point that I could actually post it, too many of the people who needed to play it would find their computers could not handle playing it. A full HD video in 1080p is already so CPU-intensive that a lot of older computers can't handle it. The current crops of phones uses hardware playback but no idea if that includes H265, and in my community few people can afford to get new phones every year.

H265's patent trolls want per-video license fees and are publicly aggressive with their language. If they ever actually start suing people (maybe store websites?), they will kill the codec but the question is do they understand that?

MPEG-LA figured that out with respect to H264, and were so worried about getting what lawsuit rumors alone did to .gif that they decided to publicly declare that H264 was licensed without royalty for all non-monetized video. That applies to the video itself, not the codec distributor but ffmpeg is presumably hosted where patents can't reach and harassing downloaders or distros would be another way to kill the codec. Presumably someone selling ads on their website could still be sued for using H264 but that probably would not happen unless they were a profit-making, ad-supported video sharing site like Youtube, Vimeo, etc. A site like Archive that does not sell ads is effectively covered by the royalty-free license for the noncommercial videos.