Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > New and alternative video codecs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 5th September 2018, 10:53   #881  |  Link
mzso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 838
Quote:
Originally Posted by hajj_3 View Post
chrome 63 was supposed to add av1 decoding support (which could be enabled using about:flags) however they removed it a week or so ago. If you were wondering why the newly released v63 didn't have it now you know why. I'm pretty sure it will be in v64, though probably disabled by default.
Chrome 63 was released last year. And 64 in January.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcomsousa View Post
Google release today Chrome 69.

Chrome 69 adds an AV1 decoder to Chrome Desktop stable (Windows, Mac, Linux, ChromeOS) based on the official bitstream specification. At this time, support is limited to "Main" profile 0 and does not include encoding capabilities. The supported container is ISO-BMFF (MP4). To enable this feature use the chrome://flags/#enable-av1-decoder flag.

At this moment it's planing be enabled by default in Chrome v70. https://www.chromestatus.com/features/5729898442260480
So I guess the encoder will be usable enough in six weeks for youtube beta testing at least.
mzso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2018, 14:49   #882  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 731
[Rav1e tune Psychovisual vs PSNR]

Quote:
Originally Posted by TD-Linux View Post
We have a very experimental option called "--tune psychovisual" that uses a different distortion metric. I'd be interested if anyone wants to compare. It's still relatively untested at the moment.
Hmm, only a short test because I ran into time issues but it seems psychovisual tune doesn't on its own prevent the blocking/banding (and texture/noise smoothing/blurring) in areas like sky or other flat regions. But it does seem to help on some noisier/dirtier textures though I can't say it would make the whole picture strictly better. Sometimes it keeps some grain where psnr drops it all, but only sometimes, elsewhere it removes everything just as "well" as psnr. Since it does do something though, I guess it might be useful down the road?

I did not get those "super weird lines" shown in the github issue thread, but I think some similar stripe artifacts do appear in smaller degree too (some transform basis function showing?).

Here are some example images: http://imgbox.com/g/l1gKciGNMk I tested it on a bluray sample I had for other purposes, 1985 animation (remaster with some noise reduction. Chroma noise has been temporally filtered by me earlier). I don't normally deal with live action footage so I have to leave that to others. The sample is a mashup of dunno, 15 scenes, 910 frames total. Lossless encode is about 500 megabytes in case anybody wants to take a look.

I noticed that rav1e at the default speed setting had about the same performance/thread as x265 settings I used for testing before (though that was at much higher bitrate than what I received now), so I decided to use the exact same CLI except for 2-pass to make a comparison clip. So these are not x265 default settings, note.

x265_2.6+2.exe - --input-depth 8 --input-res 1440x1080 --fps 24000/1001 --preset slower --output-depth 10 --ctu 32 --max-tu-size 16 --bitrate 4200 --pass 1 --tu-intra-depth 2 --tu-inter-depth 2 --rdpenalty 2 --me 3 --subme 5 --merange 92 --amp --rect --ref 6 --weightb --weightp --keyint 300 --min-keyint 1 --bframes 8 --aq-mode 1 --aq-strength 1.0 --rd 5 --psy-rd 1.6 --psy-rdoq 8.0 --rdoq-level 1 --no-sao --no-open-gop --rc-lookahead 80 --max-merge 5 --qcomp 0.70 --no-strong-intra-smoothing --no-limit-modes --limit-refs 0 --limit-tu 0 --frame-threads 1 --no-wpp --deblock -2:-2 --qg-size 8 --pbratio 1.2 --no-cutree --cu-lossless --lookahead-slices 1 --sar 1:1 --range limited --chromaloc 0 --colormatrix bt709 --no-rskip --rd-refine --cbqpoffs -2 --crqpoffs -2 -o hevc-test.hevc
(this got 4146 kbps on second pass)

Rav1e commandlines:
rav1e.exe --speed 3 --quantizer 70 --tune Psnr dump.y4m -o psnr.ivf (got ~4200 kbps)
rav1e.exe --speed 3 --quantizer 75 --tune Psychovisual dump.y4m -o psy.ivf (got ~4270 kbps)

binary used: https://ci.appveyor.com/project/tdae....195/artifacts
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2018, 14:50   #883  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 731
Also, may I have some suggestions? I realize that Rav1e is very early in development (I guess no more can be expected from encoders under the age of 2 years and/or supporting adaptive quantization and such important features).
However, there are some changes that I think could be useful to do even at this early stage.

1) there is a general lack of configurable settings and I heard some rumor that this might actually be somewhat a policy (like the nonexistent user-facing configurabiltiy in Theora?) and not just effect of being early in development.
This is an unfortunate position IMHO. x264/x265 have shown that configurability actually adds to both performance and quality because people can tweak settings. No defaults can be good for everybody.
In addition, the it's the configurability that allows testers to actually test the encoder. You can't even get feedback about your default internal tuning if random people can't test it against different set of parameters.
For example, with things like the psychovisual tuning you requested testing off, it would be useful to be able to test what changing the strength does (whether more is better or less is better, where's an apparent sweetspot, whether it is different depending on content etc...)

Things like aq-strenth, psychovisual bias settings, ratecontrol parameters like qcompress, these things absolutely have to be user-configurable in a serious encoder. Anything that has some quality-compression balance effect too, or just about any compression tool that is a bonus for compression but not always - or when there are cases where it hurts and people will want to disable it. All encoders/formats have tools like that (hello there SAO) and I don't think there are reasons for AV1 (rav1e) to be completely different. If you bar access to these parameters, you handicap the encoder by leaving compression performance potential locked away. You should strive to sell what you got, like x264/x265 does, not keep it in the vault.

Even if you disagree with all of the above, you should think about it form the PR point of view. I'm not the only person feeling like this, so exposing the parameters to users will make your encoder more attractive to users even if you think it's useless...

2) a smaller thing: there is very little feedback given by the commandline encoder. A FPS counter probably isn't completely important, but there is one thing that really would help with testing, and that is a achieved bitrate being reported at the end. I was rather suprised Rav1e didn't report this, because I wanted to encode a comparison clip with 2pass with another encoder and this is rather complicating. I have to figure it out based on filesize but the output's already in a container that has some unknown overhead... I used bitrate calculator like in 2006 but note that those generally only have 1 second precision, which is not very exact for short testing samples.
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2018, 16:11   #884  |  Link
MoSal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneaker_ger View Post
I don't have that setting in Chrome 69.0.3497.81 (stable).
Is it Chrome? or a Chromium distribution package?
__________________
saldl: a command-line downloader optimized for speed and early preview.
MoSal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2018, 16:44   #885  |  Link
marcomsousa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 47
It seems that AV1 has disable in M69 by Google in last minute

But in official docs it's still there Source
marcomsousa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2018, 22:00   #886  |  Link
sneaker_ger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoSal View Post
Is it Chrome? or a Chromium distribution package?
Chrome from Google on Windows 7 x64, not Chromium.
sneaker_ger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2018, 22:32   #887  |  Link
marcomsousa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 47
I ask information to Google and they said that the AV1 note in the media update is an error.

They pulled AV1 support in M69 as there were late changes made to the MP4 specification.
The spec has been finalized by AOM, so they have moved launch scheduling to M70.

This pull request in MP4 specification repository suggests that will be finalized soon.

Last edited by marcomsousa; 5th September 2018 at 22:42.
marcomsousa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th September 2018, 21:59   #888  |  Link
birdie
.
 
birdie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 135
AV1 support is to be reenabled in Chrome 70.
birdie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th September 2018, 07:08   #889  |  Link
marcomsousa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 47
The AV1 MP4 specification was finalized yesterday.
marcomsousa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2018, 02:20   #890  |  Link
Mr_Khyron
Member
 
Mr_Khyron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sweden
Posts: 103
Youtube has started to encode videos to AV1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1B9Fk_SgI0

You must have youtube-dl (2018-09-10)
Mr_Khyron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2018, 08:06   #891  |  Link
ChaosKing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 930
And you can download it like this
Code:
youtube-dl.exe -f 396  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1B9Fk_SgI0
__________________
AVSRepoGUI // VSRepoGUI - Package Manager for AviSynth // VapourSynth
VapourSynth Portable FATPACK || VapourSynth Database || https://github.com/avisynth-repository
ChaosKing is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2018, 08:22   #892  |  Link
marcomsousa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosKing View Post
And you can download it like this
Code:
youtube-dl.exe -f 396  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1B9Fk_SgI0

1080p
Interesting to compare this 3 formats

AV1 - 33.37MiB
Code:
youtube-dl.exe -f 399  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1B9Fk_SgI0
VP9 - 42.30MiB
Code:
youtube-dl.exe -f 248  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1B9Fk_SgI0
AVC1/H.264 - 41.34MiB
Code:
youtube-dl.exe -f 137 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1B9Fk_SgI0

Last edited by marcomsousa; 12th September 2018 at 10:13.
marcomsousa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2018, 11:23   #893  |  Link
sneaker_ger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,410
Thx. ffmpeg can decode/play it already. Interesting that it's not webm. (I know it was said mkv/webm binding isn't final yet.)
sneaker_ger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2018, 12:02   #894  |  Link
mzso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 838
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Khyron View Post
Why is the format identifier so messed up? "av01.0.05M.08" and such. On second look AVC is messed up also.

And it only goes up to 480p?
mzso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2018, 13:10   #895  |  Link
MoSal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by mzso View Post
And it only goes up to 480p?
Higher resolutions are probably still encoding
__________________
saldl: a command-line downloader optimized for speed and early preview.
MoSal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2018, 13:23   #896  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by mzso View Post
Why is the format identifier so messed up? "av01.0.05M.08" and such. On second look AVC is messed up also.
Thats not messed up, thats the codec parameters string as the MP4 specification, its used for immediate profile/level recognition without having to parse the file.

https://aomediacodec.github.io/av1-isobmff/#codecsparam

av1, Main Profile (0), Level 3.1 (05), Main Tier (M), 8 bit (08)
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2018, 13:23   #897  |  Link
marcomsousa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneaker_ger View Post
Thx. ffmpeg can decode/play it already. Interesting that it's not webm. (I know it was said mkv/webm binding isn't final yet.)
You can also decode/play with Chrome 70 DEV (via chrome://flags/)
Chrome/Firefox don't add any features that can be incompatible in the future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mzso View Post
Why is the format identifier so messed up? "av01.0.05M.08" and such.
mp4 codecs param

Quote:
Originally Posted by mzso View Post
And it only goes up to 480p?
It's beginning encoding videos with AV1 as a testing or to push the standard.
It's too expensive encoding all videos at this moment, maybe it's better waiting 1 year (with custom capable encoding hardware).
marcomsousa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2018, 20:36   #898  |  Link
mzso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 838
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
Thats not messed up, thats the codec parameters string as the MP4 specification, its used for immediate profile/level recognition without having to parse the file.

https://aomediacodec.github.io/av1-isobmff/#codecsparam

av1, Main Profile (0), Level 3.1 (05), Main Tier (M), 8 bit (08)
Ah, okay.

So, is LAV holding back support until some sort of wider adoption of AV1 is accomplished?

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcomsousa View Post
It's beginning encoding videos with AV1 as a testing or to push the standard.
It's too expensive encoding all videos at this moment, maybe it's better waiting 1 year (with custom capable encoding hardware).
I didn't suggest that YT should start converting all videos. But converting all resolutions makes sense, for the few that are encoded.
mzso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th September 2018, 05:14   #899  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcomsousa View Post
(with custom capable encoding hardware).
The era of HW encoders is behind us. HEVC was too complex to do with ASIC or even with GPU pixel shaders. Encoding with modern complex codecs like AV1 is going to be CPU, and maybe FPGA.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th September 2018, 05:50   #900  |  Link
olduser217
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
The era of HW encoders is behind us. HEVC was too complex to do with ASIC or even with GPU pixel shaders. Encoding with modern complex codecs like AV1 is going to be CPU, and maybe FPGA.
I think there are currently some mobile SOCs or surveillance SOCs that support 4K HEVC encoding with hardware accelerator.
olduser217 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:53.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.