What video container should I use? : techsupport@lemmy.world

What video container should I use? (piefed.blahaj.zone)

submitted 4 weeks ago by akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone to c/techsupport@lemmy.world

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Edit: I encode to/with(?) the codec h246. This question is about containers/filename extensions.

I am digitizing old video mediums, such as VHS, VHS-C and Mini DV. A few colleagues have asked me to do it for them, which is awesome and feels great. Now, for personal use, I ~~encode~~ save video with the .mkv container out of habit. I have no idea why that is bad or good. However, the question is, which container should I use to ensure maximum compatibility with my colleagues' phones, computers, possibly TVs? Is, for instance, .mpeg the way to go?

all 23 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] remon@ani.social 8 points 4 weeks ago* (8 children)

Pretty sure every remotely modern device can open a .mkv container. It's much more important which video codec you used for the video inside the container, that's what will cause the compatibility issues. You want to use h264 for maximum compatibility (but at the expense of taking up more storage).

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 5 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

This is the best answer. MKV is just a container. It’s the codec that will matter the most. As mentioned H264 is going to be the most ubiquitous. Even if you were to try to do MP4 it’s still dependent on the codec. You could do an MKV with MPEG Layer 2, but that’s starting to become too old as well. Also for H264, the RF plays a big part too. Go for something higher like 22-24. It’ll make for a slightly larger file, but you’ll great quality without being a raw file size. Too low and you’ll end up with a potato.

As for audio, also stick with a safe codec like MP3. Using WAV is too large, AAC is limited as are some others as well.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone [S] 4 points 4 weeks ago

Shoot! Thanks so much for mentioning the audio codecs! I was about to encode as flac because why not LOL. The audio of old family tapes are probably not considered high fidelity audiophile material anyway 🤣

parent

[–] grue@lemmy.world 1 point 4 weeks ago

Personally, I would value fidelity over ubiquity. After all, the recipient can transcode it themselves if they need to, but they're not necessarily going to be able to re-digitize it with higher quality in the future.

As such, I'd use the most modern video codec I could find (and use generous quality settings with it) and use FLAC for audio.

parent

[–] akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone [S] 2 points 4 weeks ago

Ah, gotcha. Thanks! I was already using h246, so all good there then. :D

parent

[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 2 points 4 weeks ago* (2 children)

Edit: I didn't read properly... You're doing this for other people. Maybe you should go with the conservative option, then.

(I mean if their devices already support it, there's no harm in forgoing compatibility and just go with a more modern encoding format like HEVC or better AV1. It's not like the next laptop or TV will be unable to play it... But H264 is certainly a safe bet. That's supported everywhere.)

Also second the point about the container. It doesn't really matter, just go with mkv. In the unlikely case it doesn't work, you can always take the video an put it in a different container. That kind of conversion is fast and without loss.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone [S] 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

Thanks! For some reason on Linux, I can (in some cases) "simply" rename the file with a different extension name. Would that be sufficient to do on the recipient's device, or would I need to process it more "properly" with ffmpeg (which I am using, by the way)?

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 2 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

You definitely want to do it properly with something like ffmpeg. Just renaming it leaves you with a misnamed mkv file. (Or whatever is inside.) Linux is clever enough to figure that out, because in the good old days, file extensions weren't all that important. But yeah, some other device might not. And even some Linux software might not get that. Also you won't really change anything, a name is just a name.

parent

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 1 point 4 weeks ago

I've run into issues with MKV - like my Samsung TV can technically play them, but it does much better with MP4 (I still use MKV for future-proofing, and just deal with the tv being fickle).

Most people aren't like me, and won't tolerate that inconvenience.

parent

[–] one_old_coder@piefed.social 5 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

I'm not an expert but MKV should be ubiquitous enough to please most people. You can tell reluctant people to install VLC and it should work with any codec.

I download most movies who are encoded in MP5/x265/whatever265 because it saves space, but MP4 could be better for people who only have iPhones or old TVs.

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone [S] 2 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Thanks! My very first "customer" is a Samsung guy, so mkv should work in his case. I'll definitely try somebody's iPhone to see what containers and codecs they support.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 2 points 4 weeks ago

As a Samsung TV owner, it can play MKV. But it does better (more consistent) with MP4.

To MKV is a more future-proof solution. MP4 is more compatible, today.

Tough call.

Though since it's for other people, I'd probably give them MP4, and highest quality those videos can benefit from.

parent

[–] one_old_coder@piefed.social 2 points 4 weeks ago

For Apple users, MP4 has been the standard for decades.

parent

[–] sexual_tomato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

When I digitize stuff I used MKV because it was a format that was resilient to whatever program that created it crashing in the middle of creation. Mkv is segmented and doesn't need anything to be written about the entire file. It's just small sections kind of stitched together. In my opinion this is what you should digitize to initially and then if you need other codecs then transcode later.

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone [S] 2 points 4 weeks ago

Thanks! I'll definitely stay with mkv then! :)

parent

[–] nicgentile@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

Maybe burn storage space, have a raw version that you use as the main source, and you can encode at your will to whatever as purpose requires.

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone [S] 4 points 4 weeks ago* (2 children)

Thanks! I always keep the raws, unless they explicitly ask me to delete them. My question is rather about which re-encoded/target container would be easiest to use for my colleagues and potential customers from a compatibility perspective.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] nicgentile@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

H264 MKV or MP4.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone [S] 2 points 4 weeks ago

Thanks!

parent

[–] Bo7a@piefed.ca 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

anecdata - I recently sent a usb full of .mkvs to a buddy and they all came up unplayable on his TV. I converted them to mp4 and he was fine.

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone [S] 3 points 4 weeks ago

That's crazy, because I was in the very same situation a few weeks ago. A friend wanted some stuff and they specifically wanted to be able to simply play it from the USB stick on their TV. I anticipated compatibility issues, so I made sure to grab mp4 copies from the start. It worked. :D

parent

[–] Labna@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago

The question is partially answered by the other comments. I have just few details to had :

As it's the compatibility that matter you have a question of target player to answer :

to be compatible with older player, the most widespread container is AVI. It's the lightest to decode and I never found a player without this format
to be compatible with all the recent players, there is no alternative to mp4, but beware only the mpeg-2 and h264 compression are widespread
to be compatible with all future players : the mkv is the way, as it can expose multiple stream with alternative codec for audio and video (mp3 + aac + av1 + h264 in the same file) allow the player to open the one it can read

Now you can choose !

[–] gnufuu@lemmy.ca 1 point 4 weeks ago*

Careful, you seem to confuse video encodings (e.g. mpeg, h264, h265, av1) with video containers (e.g. mkv, avi, webm). When digitizing old media, the encoding is much more important because changing it afterwards means losing quality whereas changing the container format doesn't.