this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2025
29 points (96.8% liked)

Selfhosted

60910 readers
807 users here now

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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I have an extensive movie/tv show library. Been collecting for years and is a mixed bag of media types. I would like to convert all to h265 or something similar to try and conserve space. Currently my media is sitting at around 30TB's I know from a previous post that is not as significant as some others but converting one by one would be a nightmarish undertaking. I am hoping someone has a cli script to do the conversion.

I am currently using radarr, sonarr, lidarr and readarr for my media I know lidarr and readarr are dead and am looking for an alernative either for those or the full stack. I would also like to perform the conversion of media from the downloaded format to what is suggested to the best format.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ripping straight from physical to media is just the remuxing process.
What you are doing is called an encode.
It can be good. But not as original as the original.

It's like saying an MP3 is as good as a FLAC...

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

It's not as good as the original, but again, you can't tell the difference on a 65" TV, especially with old TV shows that are 4:3

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 months ago
  1. This comment is 6 months old xD Let it die in peace
  2. Never said it's unwatchable. But you will loose detail.
    I am usually watching encodes myself as remuxes are way too size-heavy for my liking. Only special movies get the remux quality treatment.
    Whats more important: Preserving the better part of the bitrate. Crus it too much and you have Netflix at home :p