Which video format is the best?

[arjunare]

Well I was scanning some family photos, and saving some videos and it came to my mind, which is the best video format when it comes to quality, I don't care of many space it takes in my hard drive, I just want the BEST quality possible. I have read on the internet, that for this matter, AVI and MKV are very good, but are there better formats? Also I would like to know what is your opinion of the best audio format regarding quality

[RobertX]

That's an open-ended question, and it's anybody's guess, but MKV and MP4 are among the top.

If you want top-notch, in my opinion anyways, you can explore Blu Ray format all you want.

[contrail]

MKV works for the standard stuff but mp4 is up there to with more universal support

[stormium]

i’d be more concerned with the codec and resolution than the container.

[junh1024]

i’d be more concerned with the codec and resolution than the container.

Correct MKV AVI MP4 are containers ONLY and say nothing about what's inside them. MKV AVI MP4 could contain MPEG 4 ASP (aka xvid), or MPEG 4 AVC (aka H264) for video, among others, & MP3 or AC3 for audio, among others.


Containers don't definitively determine quality. Codecs matters too.
Codecs don't definitively determine quality. Bitrate matters too.
Bitrate don't definitively determine quality. Settings matters too.
Settings don't definitively determine quality. Implementations matters too.

[Tech]

That's an open-ended question, and it's anybody's guess, but MKV and MP4 are among the top.

If you want top-notch, in my opinion anyways, you can explore Blu Ray format all you want.

I don't even think .MP4 anymore (as the are simply re-encoded with whatever was added/removed... and to me quality is everything (changed my mind after some thought BD rips are direct from Blue-rays, NOT to be confused with BR).. If i can't get it in .MKV, its not worth downloading. We all have fast connections today right?

Everyone may like a balance at a reletivly small size, but if movies are important, why not go not the best, and forget the rest

[ill88eagle]

1. refer to this post: https://pirates-forum.org/Thread-Which-v...#pid201140
2. you cant make the videos any better than they already are. Any re-encoding will cause loss of quality. When you scale a picture to twice its size it will take up more space but you will see pixels
3. If your audio is already lossless, FLAC is the best option. Lossless compression. If not, dont reenncode it.

In conclusion, you are probably better off leaving your files as they are unless you wanna compromise quality for storage space

[joew771]

The best video format is the one that you like most. Size vs. quality. That's what it's all about.

Bigger size means better quality, smaller size is worse quality. Generally, that is. So what is more important for you, size or quality?

[dueda]

Joe, he said quality up there the thread, pay attention when goofing around. It's an old thread, he is probably done by now... Go find a bridge to toll...

My pick is PNG for pictures and H.264 for videos.
While JPG is the most popular, it doesn't achieve the same level of PGN, at least on default settings. Vast majority of devices that can open jpg will work with png too. Also H.265 is already around but not all PCs and phones have it built in, requiring software emulation, extra app/codec, etc.

I use 1200 dpi 32-bit scanning and try to rotate the photo to scan on diagonal. It helps hiding the scan lines but requires cropping or a gimmick to align things later, wich may cause distortion/jagged lines. Also 6000 dpi sometimes, helps a lot with the aligning. In my home scanner that's software emulated like digital zoom, so after that I just shrink the image back. Results are usually better than scanning at 1200 to begin with - So my scanner isn't doing it's job right out of the box.

For phone or digital camera made photos, I just convert/edit when I need to fix/enhance a particular one, not everything. Changing the image format (upscaling) can help but usually not.

Monitor and scanner should be calibrated beforehand to do all properly. Printer too, if hardcopies are needed.
If I want to print on high density photo paper, 2400 scans will preserve more details.

Video can vary too much and is best left to a professional service. As lil88Eagle said, digital formats can lose quality if converted, but with the right tools and in the right hands it is possible to improve quality or, at least, perception. Codecs aside, the application program to edit/convert videos is important. Sony Vegas, maybe.

Since I only do gramma's birthday videos, Full HD 1920x1080p is my choice. H.264 on Handbrake default settings will suffice for most people. Please note that the app is made for Macs and even the other versions default to Mac format - So you may want to select MKV, no crop, custom format, 1:1... That way you won't lose anything and your image frame will be exactly the same size of the source. RE-CHECK the output image size for my current version of Handbrake will fuss the numbers even setting it to 1:1, requiring manual re-enter to match the source.

But this guy sounds like -maximum quality- so I suggest 4K HVEC/H.265. Not my expertise. Anyone?