So I was "looking" at a rip of Columbo. I found one that was only around 20GB for the whole thing. The alternative was a 1080p rip that's 220GB but I don't have the space for that. Trouble is, the colours look off on the 20gb rip. It's like it's had a filter over it Everything's a bit dark and it's hard to make out detail. Left is the bad rip, right is the natural colours.Is there an easy way to go about fixing every file so the colours don't look so saturated and bad? I think even just increasing the brightness would work. Every other rip I've found seems to have the correct colours, even low res ones so I don't think it's to do with that
Download the 220GB rip episodes individually, do a lighter encode, then delete the original.
>>1548215Just looks like a slightly too high saturation, visible in that guys skin color.Just set it down a bit in your video player, VLC for example in pic related.
>>1548216>do a lighter encode,Honestly not a bad idea but the trouble is I've no idea how to do this or how much space it'll really save me. I'm not good on encode settings. And I know for damn sure I'll never get close to 20GB for the whole series. I still don't understand what witchcraft was needed for that ha I thought there'd be something I could run on the 20GB rip to just increase the brightness and desaturate the colours a little. The difference doesn't seem a million miles off but given the show has darker scenes you lose detail. The screencap I gave probably wasn't the best example. >>1548217Could I not change the video itself though instead of changing the video settings? I don't mind re-encoding them.
Oh, subquestionAnyone know where I can download subtitles for shows and then easily bake them into the mkv?I know mkvtoolnix does the latter but it's a bit cumbersome doing it one by one, I wonder if there's a quicker wayFor downloading subs I've no idea where to look. I've seen online players that search for subs and they're really good at finding and matching sub files to media but I've no idea how to do it or where they search. When I look at opensubtitles I find nothing good
>>1548218I personally wouldn't do that, espcially regarding the fact that recoding inevitably means further quality loss, but you CAN do that.ffmpeg has a hue/saturation filter ffmpeg -i input.mp4 -vf "hue=h=[dgrees on the color circle]:s=[value from -10 to 10]" output.mp4Some experimentation with smaller test chunk required.
>>1548221>I personally wouldn't do that, espcially regarding the fact that recoding inevitably means further quality loss, but you CAN do that.True but this way it saves me a lot of trouble from having to adjust the player for different files constantly. Gets worse if I'm using different devices too. I don't massively mind about the quality, I mean I can't expect the world at this filesize anyway. Thanks.I'm trying this, but I'm wondering if I should do this >>1548216 if I'm going to be re-encoding them all anyway.
>Is there an easy way to go about fixing every file so the colours don't look so saturated and bad?I mean, if you don't mind re-encoding them then load them up in whatever encoder you prefer and see if that encoder has a setting to adjust specific colors or something and apply them to all videos. The encoder should have fucked them all up equally so it should take the same setting to undo it across the set.If you mean is there a encoder that can magically guess what your eyes like seeing and set it up to come out that way I don't think so.
>>1548219You probably want a script to do that if you need to go over hundreds of files. Do you really need to merge them into the container? Your player should be able to pickup and play loose subtitle files automatically.>>1548223When using mpv, you can set automatic (and manual) profiles that trigger on filenames, folders, and many other parameters. That removes the hassle if an entire series has the exact same issue in every file.
>>1548221>>1548223Well shitTook a lot of tinkering but I finally got it looking right on a test file.Then I went to do my re-encodes.Only, and perhaps obviously, it's quadrupled the size of them all. Which now defeats the purpose of the whole thing as I accepted the tradeoff for the low filesize. Think I wasted my time bros I'm gonna cry. >>1548228I don't really know any encoders that work like that, I have basic ffmpeg and video editing skills but not sure I've seen any that let you do this. I didn't mean magically guess, I mean adjusting so it's right. I did get there with ffmpeg, only trouble is filesize. I'll try adjusting some settings and stuff of course and see how much quality I'll lose but now I'm at the stage where I'm thinking it might be more trouble than it's worth. >Do you really need to merge them into the container? Your player should be able to pickup and play loose subtitle files automaticallyOnly if they follow the same filename, right? Which they don't if you download the rips from one place and the subs from another. And then that means you have to rename all of the subs or all of the video files. I don't know of a quick qay to go about that either unless I'm just missing something. I'm hoping to set this up for my NAS as well which is why I'm trying not to be so reliant on my videoplayer fixing everything because the usage will be across different devicesIt is good to know about mpv though thanks
>>1548232>I don't know of a quickBulk rename utility
>>1548232>Only, and perhaps obviously, it's quadrupled the size of them all. Which now defeats the purpose of the whole thing as I accepted the tradeoff for the low filesize.Not that guy but I've been through that and don't even try to compete or fuck with someone elses' work. I just fuck it up. You may have lost your patience but out of curiosity what software did you use? I use Vidcoder personally when I have to encode and which settings did you opt to use? like gpu encoding? was it the same codec? what is the source and what was the output codec?I usually use Vidcoder, drag and drop into it and I think you can apply your adjusted preset to all files.>but now I'm at the stage where I'm thinking it might be more trouble than it's worthProbably which is why I would have simply told you to try to accept the quality of the picture on the left because it looks good to me and if anything the other one looks a bit washed out which might be the correct coloring but I kind of like closer to hdr type colors which maybe is what the encoder was going for. Not sure.Not to derail on whether that's hdr looking or not. Try using MPC player which I think has an option to auto-fetch subtitles but I've never used that feature and not sure if it works for tv shows.
>>1548240Also, MPC has shaders and you can select/deselect shaders fairly quickly so if you were to use MPC then you could possibly simply apply that shader when you want to watch Columbo and turn it off for everything else when you aren't.
>>1548235>Bulk rename utilityI'll check it out but the problem is it's not a bulk rename of one thing. it's bulk rename of one filename onto another filename, for each individual fileI don't know if anything does that>>1548240I used ffmpeg. I was very lazy and gave AI some comparison images and told it make this one look like that one basically. It wrote a script for me, and then I asked it to write the script for every file in the folder. It took ages to render it all but eventually it did get done. I haven't even checked the end results or compared filesizes because it was such a headache and took so much time. I think I should have just grabbed the 220GB ones and re-encoded them to be smaller.My end result looks right enough now, but it's about doubled the filesize. Still not bad I guess. I think before long I'll probably end up downloading the 220gb and encoding it to be smaller but that's in due time. I'm just worried about space on my NAS for now. The OP image isn't the best example of why the left looks bad. It's really apparent in darker scenes because the detail is genuinely just gone. Sorry I don't have a comparison image. I'll paste the script I used below. Saved as a .bat file and then ran it. As always keep backups. One of the scripts the AI gave me failed to do anything but stripped every single video file so it was just 0 bytes@echo offsetlocal enabledelayedexpansionfor /r %%f in (*.mkv) do ( echo Processing: %%f ffmpeg -i "%%f" -vf "eq=brightness=0.03:contrast=1.1:saturation=1.1,colorbalance=rm=.01" -c:v hevc_nvenc -b:v 700k -maxrate 800k -bufsize 1400k -preset medium -c:a copy "temp_%%~nxf" if exist "temp_%%~nxf" ( move /Y "temp_%%~nxf" "%%f" ) else ( echo ERROR: Encoding failed for %%f - original file retained. ))endlocal
>>1548430>then I asked it to write the script for every file in the folderI mean to automatically process the encoding for every file in the folder/subfolder
>>1548232>Only if they follow the same filename, right?mpv can have several rules like "fuzzy" and "all", among others. You can also just drag the subtitle file into the player window and it just werkz.
>>1548597I'm not OP but additionally for mpc-hc the name of the movie has to be the beginning name of the subtitle but you can add anything else after and it'll pick it up so I would have multiple sub files sitting right next to the video file and they picked up but I'd end them with .en and .es for different languages. Shit, I'd do the same thing with audio streams because I like audio commentaries so I'd extract the commentary from somewhere else and keep it alongside the video file and it would pick it up to select as an audio stream.
>>1548597>>1548618thanks. that does work for those players but I'm trying to make a fix all solution since I'll be using it across different devices, even my phone
>>1548639Yeah, I get it. I did the same thing the last couple weeks actually went through a fuckload of my movies that I had doubles/triples/quadruples of and used mkvtoolnix to just create one from the selected parts I wanted from each.
WhelpAfter the full processing I went back to look at the fruits of my labour. The colours are indeed fixed. The video quality however has shot itself to shit. This was not a worthwhile experiment. What a colossal waste of time. I don't think I need to say which rip is which from the comparison pic, it's probably quite clear. Clarity is out the window on my re-encode. Woe is me. Woe is me. Woe. Is. Me.....
>>1548818
>>1548821You don't see a distinct loss of clarity on the left one anon?
>>1548823honestly no
>>1548823Not him, I see it. Ok, first off you aren't familiar with the idea that you LOSE quality on every encode? I mean, even if it isn't much some is lost. It's lossy encoding. It's a real rookie mistake to expect LITERALLY the same exact thing. It's not FLAC to FLAC or uncompressed video or something.You should be glad it came out that good.I mean if you still want to keep your rip, I'll again mention MPC-HC with shaders because I personally use the sharpening filter which kind imho creates the illusion of making things better quality.Try it and see if it works out (at least on pc) even though I'm prepared to say you have zero interest in this because this rip is for other devices.
>>1548818Go buy a hard drive to store the heavy rip.
>>1548863Oh I'm aware, I just didn't think it'd be as drastic especially when I'm doubling the file size of the original anyway. I thought it'd be one of those where I'd only notice side by side but I noticed as soon as I played the file desuI'm not even that picky with this stuff. Well, i don't think I am but this thread probably begs to differ. I don't have a particularly good eye for it>>1548864I might just leave it at this point and accept the re-encode. I took the time for it now so eh. I think eventually I'll end up d/ling the heavy rip, then maybe re-encode it to a smaller filesize(Then probably end up unhappy with how it looks)
>>1548867Out of curiosity did you go to x265? If so consider x264. Not sure if you realized this but x265 throws out more details and creates broader areas of smoothness in video frames, x264 doesn't do that. X264 distributes the bits to cover everything even areas of video with suttle but noticeable detail and it's faster I think but not sure if that's an issue anymore with gpu encoding.
>>1548884Damn I did go x265, I thought it was superior and less space heavy. I thought it was better than x264 in all cases
>>1548215I bet The Internet Archive has a ton of Columbo rips.
>>1549370probably but filesizes would be large. I stopped bothering and I might just accept my shitty quality re-encodes as they are.Actually that's not true. I'm going to get the 1080p rip and re-encode them all to a smaller filesize.And then after that I'll probably complain they look like shit now too. Maybe I should just accept the colours on this rip and leave it at that....
I may have found my solution.Download the 1080p rip that's 220GBRe-encode them all with this commandffmpeg -hwaccel cuda -hwaccel_output_format cuda -i Columbo.mkv -c:v hevc_nvenc -preset slow -rc vbr_hq -cq 35 -b:v 0 -c:a copy Columbo_super_compressed.mkvFrom a quick run, it makes the filesize around 5 times smaller. Which should hopefully make the final rip about 44GB from 220GB And while yes, it is compressed to shit, it still looks better than the 20GB 720p rip I got. If anyone has any tips on the compression or any adjustments to the above script, I'm all ears. Thanks everyone for the help. /wsr/ bros are so based
