MKV vs. MP4

>>80622427
.avi

they're usually the same encoder anyway. the only difference is the container.
so no it doesn't matter

>>80622444

kek. I remember having a shit ton of .avi movies back in the Kazaa days. Thought the quality was excellent

>>80622471

that's what I gathered from my google research.

I know it's just containers but I always felt like the quality of mp4 was slightly weaker. maybe it's just my brain playing tricks on me

thanks for the advice dude

also, general question: how big are the movies you actually keep (for rewatches etc)?

I'm sticking with mpg

rmvb

xvid is the only way to fly

>>80622427
I prefer MKV only because I can drop other bits of information, alternate audio, subtitles etc into the container without much effort.

>>80622762

are most TVs even able to play that format? to me it's like the best formats for all-round usage are MKV and MP4 (if you want a somewhat decent quality)

>>80622982

>I can drop other bits of information, alternate audio, subtitles etc into the container without much effort.

that was actually one of the reasons why I made this thread. it's mentioned everywhere but I have the Lord of the Ring trilogy in mp4 with two audio tracks and two subtitles even though many websites mention you can only do that with MKV

>>80622495
I have a whole shelf filled with DVD-R's with 700mb movies from 2002-2010

>>80623323

I have pretty many too. what a fucking waste of CDs I could have filled with all kinds of other stuff

>>80623443
I also have a lot of CDs and DVDs with .mp3 music, .cbr/.cbz digital comics, ebooks and photos from the same decade.

>>80623591

I have all kinds of music on cds but I have the same shit on my harddrive too. fuck, I should get over it and just throw all that stuff away in order to save some space

>>80622427
Doesn't matter usually if its not anime.

Difference is subtitle format. MP4 I believe used hard coded subtitles most of the time, therefore if the video is low res, subtitles have artifacts.

As long as both use h264 and are at reasonable bit rate, its fundamentally same quality (exception with subtitles).

>>80622427
The container doesn't matter, it's the encoder that matters.

>>80624908
This.

You can use HEVC x265 to encode a 1gb mkv down to 300mb and not lose quality.

Mkv is just the newest most popular format atm.

File: 887845654656.jpg (118KB, 360x360px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 360x360px

x265 is the future

>>80624972
>mkv is the newest
MKV has been used for atleast a decade or so. Its even older than that on anime scene.

>>80624908
container matters, in the sense that you can add subtitles, alternate scenes, costume fonts, and a ton of other bullshit to an mkv, while mp4 only supports basic audio and video.

>>80625163
He said the newest mot popular. To my best of knowledge he's not wrong. After mp4 and avi it seems like mkv is the newest most used standard container.

>>80625237
>container matters, in the sense that you can add subtitles, alternate scenes, costume fonts, and a ton of other bullshit to an mkv
Not in the context the OP set, which is the picture quality. The container has fuckall to do with the type of compression, provided it supports the latest codecs. It doesn't matter unless you're using .avi for some reason, which severely limits the type of codecs you can use.

MKV is more likely to have been encoded by somebody who cares. MP4 is more likely to have been encoded by somebody putting in the minimum effort needed to not get fired.

>>80623591
>>80623443
i still got ~50 floppy 1.44"

>>80624972
>You can use HEVC x265 to encode a 1gb mkv down to 300mb and not lose quality.

how does this work?

>>80628871
It doesn't, lossy transcoding always loses quality.

>>80622444
This
Also should be under 700 mb