Selfhosted
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
-
Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
-
No spam posting.
-
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
-
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
-
No trolling.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
view the rest of the comments
Be sure to avoid "remux" quality. I didn't know what this meant at first - it's ~~a file with no compression~~ an uncompressed 1:1 copy of the source, so even "low-resolution" video files can be truly massive. A 1080p movie should be between 2GB-10GB or so; I've found that remuxes are typically 15GB-50GB, or even larger.
edit: updated for accuracy 👍
Remuxes aren’t uncompressed, nor are they losslessly compressed. They’re just a 1:1 direct copy from some other medium (generally blu-rays or DVD’s).
"Remuxing preserves the original video and audio quality because it doesn’t involve any compression"
https://techreviewadvisor.com/what-does-remux-mean/
So, what you said - it's a 1:1 copy of the source. With no compression. Which is what I said, as far as I can tell?
What I don't understand is why the article says it allows for smaller file sizes, when I've found without fail that remuxes are the largest variety by far. It made sense to me that a file produced without compression would be larger than the same file, compressed.
Ah, it looks like we have a small misunderstanding. I thought you were talking about uncompressed video, which is enormous. This is only used in HDMI cables for example. A 1080p60 uncompressed video is 2.98Gbit/s, or about 1.22 terabytes per hour.
A remux is “uncompressed” in the sense that it isn’t recompressed, or in this case transcoded. A remux is still compressed, just to a lesser degree than a transcode. This means the files are indeed larger, but the quality is also better than transcodes.
To clarify the article’s confusing statement: they claim that remuxes can reduce size by throwing away some audio streams, while keeping the original video. This is true, but the video itself hasn’t gotten any smaller: you are simply throwing away other information.
It can save data by excluding data streams that you don't need. For instance, I don't need French, Italian, Japanese, German 5.1 audio streams that each have 700Mbps bitrates or higher, nor do I need an English 1.5Gbps master audio stream, a 700 Mbps English stream, a 500 Mbps descriptive audio for the blind, and 5 different special edition commentary tracks for a film I'll watch once or twice. All those tracks can really add up, and torrent sites are often country or language specific, so remuxes might have original language and/or native language audio only.
Thank you, just went and disabled it completely, I'd never heard of that before either.