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 7th June 2016, 04:35   #201  |  Link
Jamaika
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 697
All beautifully. So far codec is a sham. Message is displayed:
None of the functions don't work.
av_interleaved_write_frame(): Broken pipe
Error writing trailer of pipe:: Broken pipe

It took some time to understand that these patterns were caused by successive accumulation of "noise" coming from the interaction between the lapping filters and the rounding that was taking place when the 12-bit "intermediate" images were being rounded down to 8 bits for use as reference in future frames. Trying to change how the rounding was done or how the lapping was done went nowhere, originally causing some concerns over the viability of lapping itself. Fortunately, two solutions eventually emerged. One was to simply store all reference frames in 12 bits rather than 8. This requires more memory and more memory bandwidth, but also improves coding efficiency for all sequences (even those that did not trigger the problem). It's something that's also needed anyway for 10-bit and 12-bit input support.
About importing files 10/12 bit we can forget.

Last edited by Jamaika; 7th June 2016 at 04:37.
Jamaika is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2016, 02:47   #202  |  Link
Nintendo Maniac 64
Registered User
 
Nintendo Maniac 64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamaika View Post
About importing files 10/12 bit we can forget.
10bit or more is necessary for good HDR, otherwise you'll have visible color banding.
Nintendo Maniac 64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2016, 12:03   #203  |  Link
Kurtnoise
Swallowed in the Sea
 
Kurtnoise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Aix-en-Provence, France
Posts: 5,191
frankly, what did you smoke ?
Kurtnoise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2016, 18:47   #204  |  Link
wiak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: somewhere north
Posts: 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clare View Post
AV1, VP10, and Daala are video-only codecs, but I have a glimmer of hope that somebody will do like my fellow Fabrice Bellard did with HEVC and BPG.
Or maybe the Alliance for OpenMedia will also propose a new still image codec, with Microsoft, Mozilla and Google on board, it could be doable to initiate a change. JPEG seems unbeatable though.



Yeah Github was being a **** yesterday because the files are too heavy when I update :/
well heard of WebP? that was basicly a VP8 frame, pretty sure someone at aomedia will do the same to AV1 and call it WebP v2, much like they did with WebM and added VP8, VP9

i expect the webm v3 spec to include AV1 with Opus

WebM v1 = VP8 + Vorbis
WebM v2 = VP9 + Opus
WebM v3 = AV1 + Opus

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmvalin View Post
Here's a new Daala demo. This one is actually revisiting all of our previous technology demos to see what worked, what didn't and how things changed.
thanks btw would been cool if there was AV1 demo pages too
__________________
Woah! Ninja?! http://nwgat.ninja/ (AV1 Overview)
"Not available in your region" has now been redefined as "Go Pirate, you filthy scum" Nwgat
wiak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2016, 19:28   #205  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,750
VP8 isn't competitive against HEVC for still images. The power of intra-frame prediction is huge, as are the variety and flexibility of block sizes. Plus the ability to losslessly encode individual TUs for graphics or text.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2016, 01:09   #206  |  Link
Nintendo Maniac 64
Registered User
 
Nintendo Maniac 64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
VP8 isn't competitive against HEVC for still images.
...no dip? Who was arguing that?
Nintendo Maniac 64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2016, 10:43   #207  |  Link
mzso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 930
By the way, how far past jpeg are we with HEVC? Too bad the IETF doesn't push for a new image format too like with video. If it became widespread on the internet it'd soon seep down to digital photography too.

JPEG is surpassed technology, yet it's pretty much the only lossy image format worth mentioning.
mzso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2016, 11:44   #208  |  Link
Jamaika
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by mzso View Post
JPEG is surpassed technology, yet it's pretty much the only lossy image format worth mentioning.
Off the topic at Daala, but ...

There was a lot of advertising for a five years to replace JPEG. He had to enter photos WEBP with codec VP9/VP10. He was BPG (HEVC), which is already very old and not updated. Advertising codecs FLIF.
The truth is that hardware manufacturers don't want to replace JPEG. JPEG evolved. He became a container 8/10/12/16 depth bit. It is with compression mode progress, which took over the technology of Adobe DNG. There isn't colormatrix bt2020 and has an old packer libzip 1.2.7. (options not supported by ffmpeg)

The program which implemented a partial identification of BPG image is MediaInfo, it is not too much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
VP8 isn't competitive against HEVC for still images. The power of intra-frame prediction is huge, as are the variety and flexibility of block sizes. Plus the ability to losslessly encode individual TUs for graphics or text.
There are no miracles. They strive for perfection.

Comparison of codecs: bitrate=3000kbps
Warning. Bitrate is false, applies to all one hundred frames and not the individual.
Original:
Daala codec v0.0-1598-g7290550
daalaenc.exe --b-frames 4 --keyframe-rate 50.000 --complexity 5 --video-rate-target 3000k --soft-target --output "image.ogg" - {functions disabled: bit-depth=10+}
Selur codec vpxenc v1.5.0-936-g6f397b8
vpxenc.exe --bit-depth=8 --input-bit-depth=8 --threads=4 --i420 --profile=0 --best --codec=vp9 --fps=50000/1000 --cpu-used=0 --passes=1 --pass=1 --drop-frame=0 --disable-kf --target-bitrate=3000
--end-usage=vbr {recommended: --end-usage=cbr --gf-cbr-boost=200} --aq-mode=1 --output="image.webm" -

Komisar codec x264 r2705kMod
x264.exe --demuxer y4m --preset veryslow -tune stillimage --input-depth 8 --input-res 1920x1080 --input-csp i420 --output-depth 8 --fps 50000/1000 --keyint 250 --bitrate 3000 --output "image.h264" -
El Heggunte GCC 5.3.0 v2.0+2
x265.exe --y4m --no-info --preset veryslow --no-open-gop --input-depth 8 --input-res 1920x1080 --input-csp i420 --output-depth 8 --fps 50000/1000 --keyint 250 --bitrate 3000 --output "image.h265" -
nwgat.ninja aomenc.exe GCC 5.3.0 v0.1-daf841b (12.07.2016)
aomenc.exe --threads=4 --i420 --profile=0 --best --codec=av1 --fps=50000/1000 --cpu-used=0 --passes=1 --pass=1 --drop-frame=0 --disable-kf --target-bitrate=3000
--end-usage=vbr {recommended: --end-usage=cbr --gf-cbr-boost=300} --aq-mode=1 --output="image.webm" -
{functions disabled: pass=2, bit-depth=10+}
Themselves evaluate codecs.

Last edited by Jamaika; 11th January 2018 at 09:46.
Jamaika is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2016, 15:39   #209  |  Link
BadFrame
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by mzso View Post
By the way, how far past jpeg are we with HEVC?
Wyohknott at github offers a wide range of comparisons, AOM AV1, BGP, Daala, Webp, FLIF, VP10 ... and of course jpeg

Here's a comparison between OAM AV1 and HEVC:

http://wyohknott.github.io/image-for...ot&aom=m&bpg=m

There are lots of images to compare with as well, just choose your combinations from the drop down lists.
BadFrame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2016, 21:07   #210  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by wiak View Post
well heard of WebP? that was basicly a VP8 frame, pretty sure someone at aomedia will do the same to AV1 and call it WebP v2, much like they did with WebM and added VP8, VP9
VP9 never made it into webp, which is a shame. Their excuse for not doing it was "we don't want fragmentation" which was IMHO pretty bad idea/mistake, because webp still has very little support (and where it is, it is software/browser based, so what are we even talking about?) and hence you can still update it like that.
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2016, 04:51   #211  |  Link
Quikee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamaika View Post
The truth is that hardware manufacturers don't want to replace JPEG. JPEG evolved. He became a container 8/10/12/16 depth bit. It is with compression mode progress, which took over the technology of Adobe DNG. There isn't colormatrix bt2020 and has an old packer libzip 1.2.7. (options not supported by ffmpeg)
JPEG wasn't replaced because it has a good enough compression ratio, has low complexity and its support is practically 100%. Also in all the years there was no viable alternative available - by that I mean a format that has a much better 50%+ compression ratio, is free (no patent issues), standarized, has reasonable complexity and has support in majority of browsers.

JPEG/JFIF - the standard format that has largest support didn't evolve much. Yes, it become faster to encode/decode, it gained quality/size because of more clever compression techniques that don't require to break the bitstream. However it didn't gain support for 10+ bit or anything such. Even the support for arithmetic coding (which should be part of the standard) instead of huffman can be problematic so you don't want to use it (and nobody does) for compatibility reasons.
Quikee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2016, 05:56   #212  |  Link
Jamaika
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quikee View Post
However it didn't gain support for 10+ bit or anything such. Even the support for arithmetic coding (which should be part of the standard) instead of huffman can be problematic so you don't want to use it (and nobody does) for compatibility reasons.
Can see more and more converters JPEG 10+ bit on standard 9.2.
12-bit JPEG codec on CUDA

Last edited by Jamaika; 13th July 2016 at 07:01.
Jamaika is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2016, 11:41   #213  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamaika View Post
Can see more and more converters JPEG 10+ bit on standard 9.2.
12-bit JPEG codec on CUDA
libjpeg isn't the JPEG standard, and in fact libjpeg7+ have been shunned because they break JPEG compatibility for no good reason, and the guy's frankly a little nutty. The recent 10-bit support is actually a good reason, but again, broken compatibility -- everyone writing and using decoders is too conservative to care about anything but the same JPEGs everyone's been using for over 20 years, and so no minor variant of it will ever matter.

DejaVu might've been successful years ago if it wasn't a giant pile of patents. Otherwise, storage and network speeds have improved too much, and the benefits of deep color too slim, for the masses to ever demand an update.
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2016, 12:23   #214  |  Link
Quikee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxyshadis View Post
libjpeg isn't the JPEG standard, and in fact libjpeg7+ have been shunned because they break JPEG compatibility for no good reason, and the guy's frankly a little nutty. The recent 10-bit support is actually a good reason, but again, broken compatibility -- everyone writing and using decoders is too conservative to care about anything but the same JPEGs everyone's been using for over 20 years, and so no minor variant of it will ever matter.
Yes, the mostly used open source library is libjpeg-turbo which is generally an fork of an old version of libjpeg with performance improvements added. libjpeg-turbo stopped following changes from libjpeg when they started with adding non-standard stuff and breaking ABI for no reason, so very few projects actually use libjpeg library today.

There is also JPEG-XT which is relatively new. The point of this format is to be compatible with JPEG and can be decompressed as a standard JPEG file. Additionally to that it would have extensions embedded in the container like high bit depth and lossless support which a JPEG-XT supported decoder could use. Nice idea but I don't think it will catch on..
Quikee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2016, 13:09   #215  |  Link
Jamaika
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxyshadis View Post
libjpeg isn't the JPEG standard, and in fact libjpeg7+ have been shunned because they break JPEG compatibility for no good reason, ...
You're right, but recently a lot of advertising on 10bit MOV MJPEG. It is fiction, but I let myself be fooled.

http://www.acrovid.com/footagestudio.htm
http://www.cinemartin.com/next/

10bit lossy is Cineform, but it isn't MJPG.
How do I find a compact camera with 10bit JPEG images, I add a link.
http://www.shikino.co.jp/eng/product...er1.01E_HP.pdf
http://www.shikino.co.jp/eng/products/
http://www.shikino.co.jp/eng/products/ip-1.html
http://www.sansmirror.com/cameras/a-...x7-review.html

Last edited by Jamaika; 13th July 2016 at 15:06.
Jamaika is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2016, 14:09   #216  |  Link
BadFrame
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quikee View Post
There is also JPEG-XT which is relatively new. The point of this format is to be compatible with JPEG and can be decompressed as a standard JPEG file. Additionally to that it would have extensions embedded in the container like high bit depth and lossless support which a JPEG-XT supported decoder could use. Nice idea but I don't think it will catch on..
I'd say not a chance, given that a lot of the standard is patented and subject to royalties.

Like you said, for a new format to come and replace jpeg, it needs to be royalty free (ain't no way the 'web' is going to start paying royalties for serving images), and a worthwhile improvement in compression, the ~50% you mentioned sounds reasonable.

I also think that widely supported hardware accelerated decoding would be needed, since the new format would most likely be more expensive cpu-wise.

I believe the only realistic option would be if AV1 was also offered as a image codec, Intel, AMD, ARM, NVidia are all aboard to support the AV1 codec, and Android SoC manufacturers like Qualcomm, Samsung will of course support it, and it's royalty free which means it can gain traction on the web and in apps (as in being supported).

As for the existing offerings, WebP was never good enough in lossy mode (lossless is great though), BGP is based on HEVC and thus patented/royalties = dead in the water, FLIF and Daala are promising but I can't see them ever gain hardware accelerated support.
BadFrame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th July 2016, 01:00   #217  |  Link
Quikee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamaika View Post
You're right, but recently a lot of advertising on 10bit MOV MJPEG. It is fiction, but I let myself be fooled.
It's not that it can't be done and looks like some try to add support for 10bit, but doing this is like adding 10bit support to MPEG2 - it can be done but you can't use any existing MPEG2 equipment to play it back - so what's the point of doing it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamaika View Post
10bit lossy is Cineform, but it isn't MJPG.
How do I find a compact camera with 10bit JPEG images, I add a link.
They use JPEG (extended) for 12bit which I think is JPEG XT (XT - extended) that I described in my previous post. So again - you will need a special decoder for such images to get all 12bits back, with a standard JPEG decoder you will get only 8bits.

They also talk about JPEG XR which is a completely different codec.
Quikee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th July 2016, 01:42   #218  |  Link
Quikee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadFrame View Post
I'd say not a chance, given that a lot of the standard is patented and subject to royalties.
I didn't look into royalties as I assumed JPEG (the committee) learned its lessons regarding patents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BadFrame View Post
I also think that widely supported hardware accelerated decoding would be needed, since the new format would most likely be more expensive cpu-wise.
Sure, that would be a bonus but I don't think this is required for success of a image codec. I think hardware manufacturers would fill this gap regardless if they are on-board from the start or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BadFrame View Post
I believe the only realistic option would be if AV1 was also offered as a image codec, Intel, AMD, ARM, NVidia are all aboard to support the AV1 codec, and Android SoC manufacturers like Qualcomm, Samsung will of course support it, and it's royalty free which means it can gain traction on the web and in apps (as in being supported).
Yes, a new image codec from AOM would probably be successful but it doesn't need to be based on AV1. It could be based on Daala. A image codec is not priority now for AOM but I think they will looking into it when AV1 is launched.
Quikee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th July 2016, 04:11   #219  |  Link
Jamaika
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quikee View Post
So again - you will need a special decoder for such images to get all 12bits back, with a standard JPEG decoder you will get only 8bits.
It's just me not surprised. It is worse with the comfort of work.
It remains to use the DNG.
https://photographylife.com/dng-vs-raw
Jamaika is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th July 2016, 14:03   #220  |  Link
BadFrame
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quikee View Post
I didn't look into royalties as I assumed JPEG (the committee) learned its lessons regarding patents.
One would think so with the history of jpeg and unused potential due to patents, however that is not the case.

From what I've read, not even XR baseline profile is guaranteed to be free from royalties (!), it's clear to me that the jpeg committee has lost any relevance, attempting to introduce a patent-burdened image codec today when even video is going towards royalty free is just insane.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quikee View Post
Sure, that would be a bonus but I don't think this is required for success of a image codec. I think hardware manufacturers would fill this gap regardless if they are on-board from the start or not.
Depending on your definition of success, I think I disagree, as my definition would be replacing jpeg as the de facto (lossy) image format. Given how mobile is increasingly becoming the way people consume web content, I think the chance of gaining the necessary traction without hardware decoding is very unlikely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quikee View Post
Yes, a new image codec from AOM would probably be successful but it doesn't need to be based on AV1. It could be based on Daala.
Sure, Mozilla/Daala are part of the AOM so it's certainly not impossible, my doubt again comes back to hardware support, AV1 will be hardware supported, which most likely means it should be easier to implement a hardware accelerated image codec based upon it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quikee View Post
A image codec is not priority now for AOM but I think they will looking into it when AV1 is launched.
Here's hoping.

Of course, AV1 itself also needs to survive what I expect to be a massive patent aggression from the MPEG LA group, they won't give up their patent cash cow business model of : 'pick a bunch of patents from the pool, implement a slight improvement on the current video codec standard, charge royalties, rinse and repeat' : without a fight.

That said, with the companies behind AOM, I think we have the best chance ever of seeing royalty laden video codecs be history.
BadFrame 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 11:06.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.