this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2025
0 points (NaN% liked)

Selfhosted

56958 readers
1416 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:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. 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.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

  7. No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
0
Asking for suggestions on managing media (lemmy.world)
submitted 7 months ago by jhdeval@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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.

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] illusionist@lemmy.zip 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I'll just leave this here https://locatarr.github.io/

I have no experience using it https://home.tdarr.io/

Internet people say that if you reencode the movies, you will lose information and sacrifice quality. I do not know if it is noticable! It is probably visible on a large screen and definitely not on a small one. Like always: shit in, shit out.

You should always use the best source possible. If you don't have it, maybe someone who has it should do it and not you. I would wait for this person to do it and redownload it once it is available.

To me it just makes more sense that the person creating the 264/265 video does it instead of all the guys who just downloaded it. It's also better for the environment if only one person does it.

265 is not the future gold standard anymore but av1 is. If you are to do it, go for av1 but make sure all your devices can play it natively.

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Lidarr ain't dead.

They juat don't have too much time to fix the metadata issue.
Jesus folks. Have some patience with devs donating their free time after work to fix your little media addiction.
If they arent fast enough for you, do it manually or use another program...

[–] jhdeval@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I never stopped using it and just got an update today or yesterday for it. I was going on what was posted here. I never meant to start any trouble.

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 7 months ago

It's just what was sad that irked me.
No offense taken (and hopefully non given). I hope you continue enjoying this hobby :)

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Don't, unless your library is entirely in UHD/4K you're going to seriously hurt quality by compressing with h265. And it won't be that big if a difference in size. And if you ignore that advice at least don't recompress it from already compressed sources. There are lots of h265 files made from high quality sources out there you should download to replace them instead.

[–] edent@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The question is why do you want to convert them?

If you use something like JellyFin as your media server and client, it will transcode them as you watch them. If you're on your phone using crappy WiFi, it will adapt the bitrate down automatically. If you're at home using a projector connected by Ethernet, you'll get the original file.

If you think you're running out of space, it's often easier and cheaper to buy more HDDs. H265 and modern audio codec will save you a maximum of 50%. For about £200 you can get a 15TB HDD.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Hell, I've found ripping a DVD to MKV results in a 3-5gb file.

Then converting that MKV using handbrake, I can bring the size down as much as 75%. When you're talking about a thousand videos, that adds up.

TV series (especially older stuff) I can consistently reduce 80%+. This makes a real difference for shows that were on for 10 years.

And these all look fine on a 65" TV from 6' away. Why store more if I don't have to?

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 7 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 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month 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 1 month 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
[–] jhdeval@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It is not necessarily about saving space so much as it is about uniformity. And yes my server is beefy but you get 3 or 4 people all transcoding at the sane time and that beefy server will choke. As I have said I have been collecting for many years with a very large mixed bag of codecs I am just trying to clean up the mess that is my media.

[–] edent@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

OK, but why do you care about uniformity? If it's just some OCD-adjacent urge - that's fine; do what makes you happy.

But from a technical point of view, VLC will play back no matter what the codec and compression level.