A few comparisons

Unless you’re just placing the HEVC file on a USB stick to watch on your TV, you might be interested in seeing how HEVC compares to ProRes 4444 XQ when uploaded to YouTube. Would the differences become negligible? We set about to answer that question. You can find the uploads here:
 
Last edited:
Apples to oranges. You're using a low grade consumer HEVC codec. x265 has high bitrate options to equal Prores 4444 XQ.

--profile main444-12-intra
--lossless

"Enables true lossless coding by bypassing scaling, transform, quantization and in-loop filter processes. This is used for ultra-high bitrates with zero loss of quality. Reconstructed output pictures are bit-exact to the input pictures."

NVENC also have 8K 10 bit lossless coding, 444 chroma sub-sampling and B-frames on 6th gen and above NVIDIA GPU.
 
Last edited:
Tom Roper said:
Apples to oranges. You're using a low grade consumer HEVC codec. x265 has high bitrate options to equal or exceed Prores 4444 XQ.

--profile main444-12-intra
--lossless

"Enables true lossless coding by bypassing scaling, transform, quantization and in-loop filter processes. This is used for ultra-high bitrates with zero loss of quality. Reconstructed output pictures are bit-exact to the input pictures."
Click to expand...
I know, right? The same lousy H.265 HEVC Main 10 used for Blu rays.
 
I bet you could not find anyone beside yourself, foolish enough to call H.265 Main 10 for Blu-rays lousy. If not for the competition from defunct HD-DVD, Blu-ray would have been mpeg2.
 
Tom Roper said:
I bet you could not find anyone beside yourself, foolish enough to call H.265 Main 10 for Blu-rays lousy. If not for the competition from defunct HD-DVD, Blu-ray would have been mpeg2.
Click to expand...
Guess you don’t understand sarcasm. You're the one going on about "low grade consumer HEVC" while commercial Blu rays use 10-bit 4:2:0. Whatever the case may be, the purpose of comparing HEVC Main 10 to ProRes is that many are uploading to YouTube using the HEVC that is available in popular NLEs like DaVinci Resolve and in apps like Apple Compressor. I also did a comparison between HEVC 10-bit 4:2:2 and 4:2:0 for the simple reason that Adobe, Final Cut and Resolve all recently added support for 10-bit 4:2:2 with Apple silicon. From the number of filmmakers that have downloaded my clips, it would appear that there is some interest in the community for these types of comparisons. If it turns out that millions are uploading to YT using x265 profile main444-12-intra, I'd be more than happy to compare that too. Sorry you aren’t happy with my comparisons. Have a great day.
 
Last edited:
That aside, there is no question that Prores 4444 XQ is a superior quality format in general than any GOP compressed format including HEVC. It's just that when we speak in absolutes, or imply absolutes like A > B, there may be exceptions. I have uploaded to YouTube in many formats. In the end, the YouTube recommendations for format and bit rate seem reasonable given it will be re-encoded anyway. One other factor with standalone HEVC encoders is that they may accept only YUV for input, meaning if you have to use a lossless high bit rate 444 intermediate codec for input, there is little point in further transforming it to lossless HEVC; rather the goal of HEVC is efficiency and compactness, lower bit rate and smaller file sizes while accepting an expected sacrifice in quality. I actually do appreciate your comparisons and other observations as well, however I already expect that Prores 4444 XQ have higher quality than HEVC.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top