That comment isn't really answerableso what quality would you suggest for me because i want to be able to record long sessions and stuff i want ok-good quality with low storage
I don't see h.265 or HVEC?
Reasonable storage like I have a 2tb hard drive but if I keep recording about 40gb of gaming footage which is about an hour I would want to lower that by a lot. Ok quality as in watchable of course but not looking like dog crap. Also I will be getting my obs log so you can look at it but thanks for this i guess?That comment isn't really answerable
What do you mean by low storage? what do you define as ok quality? what is 'long'?
like so much in life, there is no free lunch. Higher quality requires either more storage, or more compute to drive compression.
What one person considers ok quality, another won't. What you mean by low storage vs what I or others consider reasonable storage will vary (possibly widely). For me, I locally record 80->90 minute livestream sessions at around 12GB per session, and that is fine for my use case [from NVENC on a GTX 1660 Super]. But what will drive that quality is determined by how and on what you'll use those videos
So, I'm guessing (as you ignored the only pinned post in this forum about posting an OBS log, so we can't see your OBS settings to comment), that you adjusted the default NVENC recording quality. And that is why you file size is so large. Or you changed the color range? or this was a recording for many, many hours?
Like the old axiom of choosing between quality speed and price, where you get to pick 2 and the 3rd (leg of a triangle) becomes a given (not something you can control), meaning in this case, pick what is important to you. Usually, people don't want to get a new computer, so encoding quality will be driven by your existing CPU and GPU. HDDs, on the other hand, are relatively cheap, so storage is cheapest item to add extra of. So, if spending money on storage is needed and possible, then pick best recording quality your system can handle that you find acceptable. Then move recordings as required if internal storage is limited. For example, if getting more storage isn't an option, then you optimize your recordings for storage space (as limited by CPU/GPU), and you'll have to accept whatever quality that results in.
yeah still tho it's sorta what I'm looking for but yeah for now I think that's fine unless I figure out something else in my obs setting is making it use more storage.cq=30 is somewhat medium quality. It has visible compression artifacts. Not suited for postprocessing and later upload to some video service to fill a video channel, but if you just want to revisit and check your gameplay for yourself, definitely a way to go to keep file size low.
You really should never record locally with CBR. It's necessary while streaming to be compatible with HLS and the chunking/replication infrastructure. It is hands-down the absolute WORST method when recording locally, prone both to bitrate wastage on simple/low-motion scenes, and bitrate-choke on high complexity and fast-motion scenes.Its one of those things that you need to experiment to work out what you feel is acceptable.
I personally use H.265/HVEC AMD AMF or H.265/HVEC Nvidia NVENC, Constant Bitrate (CBR) at 40M/Bit, for 2K/60FPS to record PS5 4K/60FPS gameplay to a HDD. This results in 16GB to 18GB per hour and I am happy with the quality.
And that is why I am using CBR. Additionally by the time youtube has finished butchering the image quality after I upload my videos CQP literally is a waste of space. Im happy with the resulting image quality using CBR, it works for my needs.You really should never record locally with CBR. It's necessary while streaming to be compatible with HLS and the chunking/replication infrastructure. It is hands-down the absolute WORST method when recording locally, prone both to bitrate wastage on simple/low-motion scenes, and bitrate-choke on high complexity and fast-motion scenes.
For local recording, you should be using CQP or CRF, depending on which encoder you're using. It does mean more variable storage use (depending on the content being recorded), but results in consistent image quality. By design, as that is its primary metric and focus.
That's ok, if you directly upload your recordings without any postprocessing. Postprocessing means any type of work that recodes the video data, which usually takes place if you cut or edit the video.And that is why I am using CBR. Additionally by the time youtube has finished butchering the image quality after I upload my videos CQP literally is a waste of space. Im happy with the resulting image quality using CBR, it works for my needs.