How many gigs of data in your blu ray rips collection?
#1
i've been thinking about using kodi as a media center for my modest but steadily growing movie collection...which i'm sure a lot of you do as well.

my question is how much storage are you using on HDD/NAS/etc,


just a quick search shows a blu ray rip can be about 50-60 GB....but to make the math simpler lets take a way high end and say a rip for 1080p is 100 GB per movie....that means a 1 TB HDD will hold 10 movies?

so how are most of you dealing with just the sheer size of storage for your collections?

i've seen people post have NAS with a few drives in them....any other ways?
Reply
#2
Uhh... No?

The largest Blu-Ray video disc can be is 50GB so no rip of a Blu-Ray video disc can be larger than 50GB. So rounding ABOVE 50GB is a HUGE mistake. While the typical ISO of a Blu-Ray disc can be in the range of 30-45GB, however these include all the extras. There's also 'Remuxes' which mux just the movie and an audio stream to a single MKV, stripping out the commentary, trailers, special features, alternate languages, ect, to get a movie typically around the 25GB range. And then you have re-encodes that more typically run 5-15GB.
Reply
#3
About 28TB, with most movies averaging 8-12gb per movie. I have somewhere between 1650-1700 movies.
Reply
#4
I'll just say that I have started to replace my 2TB drives with 4TB drives. Smile
Reply
#5
(2015-02-07, 20:12)DJ_Izumi Wrote: Uhh... No?

The largest Blu-Ray video disc can be is 50GB so no rip of a Blu-Ray video disc can be larger than 50GB. So rounding ABOVE 50GB is a HUGE mistake. While the typical ISO of a Blu-Ray disc can be in the range of 30-45GB, however these include all the extras. There's also 'Remuxes' which mux just the movie and an audio stream to a single MKV, stripping out the commentary, trailers, special features, alternate languages, ect, to get a movie typically around the 25GB range. And then you have re-encodes that more typically run 5-15GB.

This is pretty much what I was going to say.

Reply
#6
c.5GB for a basic rip-and-recode of an animation, 7.5GB for live action, up to 10GB if you compress less and/or keep all the audio tracks (HD audio in particular sends the size north), average of 25GB for an unmodified main movie rip (e.g. Transformers 4 is 34GB native with 5.1 single audio, versus 17GB for Mr Peabody and Sherman). After that, it's a function of how many you have and/or intend to purchase...

Most of us with any kind of decent collection rapidly head into the multi-TB NAS territory - whether you re-encode or not...
Reply
#7
I'm experimenting with trans-coding a remux to HEVC. I'm curious what kind of size and quality results I can see. I'm a little disappointed that Handbrake is only able to use about 70-80% of my i7 4930K. But I'm averaging 14fps which is doable.
Reply
#8
(2015-02-07, 20:12)DJ_Izumi Wrote: Uhh... No?

The largest Blu-Ray video disc can be is 50GB so no rip of a Blu-Ray video disc can be larger than 50GB. So rounding ABOVE 50GB is a HUGE mistake. While the typical ISO of a Blu-Ray disc can be in the range of 30-45GB, however these include all the extras. There's also 'Remuxes' which mux just the movie and an audio stream to a single MKV, stripping out the commentary, trailers, special features, alternate languages, ect, to get a movie typically around the 25GB range. And then you have re-encodes that more typically run 5-15GB.

ahh ok...wow...thats more reasonable...again quick 5 sec google search...i should have looked a little harder. appreciate the knowledge
Reply
#9
about 17 TB total with about 650 remuxed blu rays. Average blu ray remux is about 25 gb
Display: LG OLED77C9 | A/V Receiver: Denon AVR-X4500H | 2019 Nvidia Shield Tv Pro | Apple TV 4K | 2017 Roku Ultra | HTPC | Game PC | PS5 
Reply
#10
(2015-02-07, 22:49)DJ_Izumi Wrote: I'm experimenting with trans-coding a remux to HEVC. I'm curious what kind of size and quality results I can see. I'm a little disappointed that Handbrake is only able to use about 70-80% of my i7 4930K. But I'm averaging 14fps which is doable.
I used crf 17 for x264 same crf value which is higher quality in HEVC gave me 10-20% less file size. CRF 19 was 30-40% reduction in file size and probably the same quality as crf 17 in x264.

However multi threading performance with hevc is a nightmare.
I have 12 core 3.06ghc and my framerate was 10 compared to 40 with x264.
Reply
#11
It also depends on where you live. You'll find quality of Blu-ray can vary massively between the North America releases and Europe releases.
Please read the online manual (wiki) & FAQ (wiki) before posting.

Skins: Estuary | Xperience1080
Opinion: Never purchase HTC products
Reply
#12
(2015-02-07, 22:49)DJ_Izumi Wrote: I'm experimenting with trans-coding a remux to HEVC. I'm curious what kind of size and quality results I can see. I'm a little disappointed that Handbrake is only able to use about 70-80% of my i7 4930K. But I'm averaging 14fps which is doable.

Handbrake? Sad There's your problem. Try either creating a script or using a GUI like Hybrid (not to be confused with hybrid encoding).

x265 is stable enough, but not worth it right now - you're better off using H.264 (x264) encoding and doing it correctly. Ideally you'd create a hybrid encode from multiple sources, but that takes a long time. A quick rule of thumb is the following:

Video:
crf ~ 17-19
make use of psyrd/trellis and aq
Be careful with mb-tree, if using it then increase your qcomp.
don't forget about levels and the maximum for compatibility.

Audio:
Mux included audio (if important) or to reduce size convert to ac3 or FLAC (ac3 is the best option)

Subtitles:
OCR them or grab from the web

There are so many ways of encoding, but the above is general advice I give.
Please read the online manual (wiki) & FAQ (wiki) before posting.

Skins: Estuary | Xperience1080
Opinion: Never purchase HTC products
Reply
#13
(2015-02-08, 08:44)Piers Wrote: Handbrake? Sad There's your problem. Try either creating a script or using a GUI like Hybrid (not to be confused with hybrid encoding).

x265 is stable enough, but not worth it right now - you're better off using H.264 (x264) encoding and doing it correctly. Ideally you'd create a hybrid encode from multiple sources, but that takes a long time. A quick rule of thumb is the following:

Video:
crf ~ 17-19
make use of psyrd/trellis and aq
Be careful with mb-tree, if using it then increase your qcomp.
don't forget about levels and the maximum for compatibility.

Audio:
Mux included audio (if important) or to reduce size convert to ac3 or FLAC (ac3 is the best option)

Subtitles:
OCR them or grab from the web

There are so many ways of encoding, but the above is general advice I give.

I was toying around more with CRF13 with DTS audio. Tongue Which even then still got me to 8GB. But I really don't think I want to invest the CPU cycles in doing my own encodes 3hrs at a time. Though looking at the results, I think I'll be all over HEVC once it's popular in the scene.
Reply
#14
I hope HEVC gets to a point where it's popular to be used. It's still not as good as x264 apparently in PQ but I hope by the end of this year it'll start to replace x264.
Reply
#15
Basically more drive = more movies. Otherwise compress them to be smaller will also get you there with less storage. I personally use drives and 3TB offers some of the best $/gb
Reply

Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
How many gigs of data in your blu ray rips collection?0