Edius workgroup 9 and H.265 exporting

[Ulisse]

I have heard that initially only hardware encoding is possible, this gives a clear clue that software encoding will come

However, the quality of H265 is no better than H264, so there is no quality gain once it is available, the only benefit is smaller file size and that is not an issue for me

But I read there aren't artifacts with H.265 video. Therefore the video looks better.

If you need H.265 so badly, either use Handbrake
or purchase Mastering Works 6 and leverage the power of your 1080ti to process using NVENC.

Why do you think H.265 is no good like H.264? Yet Intenet is full of news where they are telling H.265 gives a better image quality than H.264, as well as giving a less heavy file. Then android players read more easily those files.

[antonsvideo]

ahahhh, are you talking small file for phone playback etc?

I assumed you mean for full UHD playback on UHD TV

[Jerry]

Once H.265 is universally implemented then it will be easier to use.
At this point, it still hasn't reached maturity.

[ulyssesvideo]

for me..at this stage... h.265 is pointless as it is not widely used by the general public as yet. what is the hurry??
just curious. thanks

[GrassValley_PS]

It's a big deal for people in the field who are having to send files (usually FTP) back to a location. The smaller file size for equal quality of h.264 means much quicker sends.

[Ron Evans]

The real value for h265 is for UHD files. I shoot about 22 shows a year so for my GH5 UHD files that is about 2.8T. Edited with the files from the NX5U, AX53 and Ax100 I make a DVD, a Bluray and I would like to erase all the source files after a while as the total is now getting out of hand !!! It would be nice to have a smaller file size copy of the GH5 UHD files, not to edit again but maybe to watch in the future on a UHD TV complementary to the Bluray. Having tried a few, admittedly scaled to my HD TV files at 50Mbps encoded with NVENC in TMPGenc 6 look just like the originals played the same way. No doubt there may be a difference on a quality UHD TV. Ulisse could check this for us. But that is a big saving to 1/3 the file size. Lots of players also have hardware decode so not a strain for low cost players either. It may be possible to encode to even lower data rates for the fixed camera position I use too. Be like sitting in the audience watching the show in UHD !!!

[ulyssesvideo]

quote:
It's a big deal for people in the field who are having to send files (usually FTP) back to a location. The smaller file size for equal quality of h.264 means much quicker sends.

=====
I can understand that... but with the new technology of 4g/5g and faster internet connections being so fast now... I still wouldn't worry about h.265 as yet... the quality is good, but is it true broadcast quality?

[Ulisse]

ahahhh, are you talking small file for phone playback etc?

I assumed you mean for full UHD playback on UHD TV

I never made videos for phone, I only make UHD videos for big UHD TVs and screen projections (UHD 3840 x 2160). Even if I don't sell my documentaries I want to get the best image quality. If you had to go on the Internet you will read that the video quality of the H.265 file it's slightly better than that the H.264 file. Although I don't rely heavily on things read on the Internet, I never read H.264 file gives a better image quality than H.265 file.

Then there is another aspect: I use GH5 for my shots and although in my country there is Pal system, I shoot in 60p 150Mbps 8bit. When I export from Edius WG 9 timeline an UHD project to XAVC S 150Mbps there are no external players reading that file. I tried with TV android player and Minix MINIX NEO U9-H. I always notice a not fluid video. Sometime it jerky. H.265 besides being read by every player, it is a very good quality too.
I'd like to export to H.264 from Edius timeline and watch that file with external players but I often can't do it. I often have to use HandBrake or TMPGEnc to make a H.265 file.
Maybe could somebody of you give me a better advice?

[antonsvideo]

when you mentioned android earlier, I assumed phone

what about MXF playback for UHD? It would be the best quality

[Ulisse]

what about MXF playback for UHD? It would be the best quality

I made a try with MXF file for UHD. I played that file on UHD Android TV with Kodi and this player doesn't see that MXF file, then I tried it with MX Player Pro. It sees that file but then MX Player Pro is not able to play it. On the other hand I just exported a bit more than 1 minute from Edius timeline and I got 13GB MXF file.

[kpot]

I made a try with MXF file for UHD. I played that file on UHD Android TV with Kodi and this player doesn't see that MXF file, then I tried it with MX Player Pro. It sees that file but then MX Player Pro is not able to play it. On the other hand I just exported a bit more than 1 minute from Edius timeline and I got 13GB MXF file.

Once more:
In your OP you (asked three questions and) gave yourself an answer:
"... do you know why Edius workgroup 9 can't export a H.265 file?"
Yet there are free software that does it well.

- You have noticed that Edius cannot currently export h.265 files with your processor.
- You've noticed that there's free software that can do that.
- And finally, you have found that this free software "does it well".

IMHO (to the OP and the following discussions): Is this not an sufficient answer to your question - as things stand at present ??

// But its an interesting thread.
Have a nice weekend - kurt