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. |
2nd June 2021, 04:25 | #421 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 117
|
Quote:
So you have the same baseline to compare their inherent complexity.
__________________
Previously iwod |
|
2nd June 2021, 06:37 | #423 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 706
|
I posted the codec test because someone did something there. Probably the mega-data flow on the satellite. Nothing is said about amateur. As for the profession of filmmaker, editor. I see that a professional changes the processor every six months to a newer one to make it faster. The question is whether the movie is better. No, money matters here. What is the quality of the camera optics and filming technique? Does software such as Adobe Premiere keep up with the news of all graphics cards? I do not think so.
What about SIMD? VTM / AOM codecs have SIMD. The problem is that they are only for Windows 32bit. |
2nd June 2021, 16:46 | #425 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 117
|
__________________
Previously iwod |
3rd June 2021, 20:50 | #426 | Link | |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,770
|
Quote:
Nor do reference comparison tests have the psychovisual tuning that real-world encoders use to make for good subjective quality across a wide range of content possible. Adaptive quantization, adaptive frame types, and VBV rate control are essential to a production encoder but not evaluated in reference comparisons. The tools for that kind of psychovisual tuning aren't stressed in reference comparisons, and have a huge real-world impact. A big reason that VC-1 didn't have long-term viability against H.264 was that the adaptive QP signaling syntax in VC-1 was just a RLE of QP offsets. The overhead of doing that for most blocks in a frame was so high that it reduced how many bits were available for actually encoding those blocks. H.264 had a much more efficient syntax which made lots of intra-frame variation much more feasible. AV1's requirement to not use any IP that was patented meant that lots of its tools weren't the optimal ones to do. So they wound up with ones with lots of potential variations to test, and ones that are expensive to decode and so expensive to try alternatives of. Which is why all the examples of "AV1 is better than HEVC" tend to be 10% lower bitrates on VMAF at >10x the encoding time. That's stuff that reference comparisons don't pick up on, but are very important to real-world viability. And since AV1 was tuned using VMAF, it gets higher VMAF scores for the same subjective quality, and so VMAF is a worse tool to evaluate with. Once any metric is demonstrate to have good subjective correlation and starts to get used to make codec and encoder decisions, developers start optimizing for the metric directly instead of for the thing the metric is attempting to capture. And thus the subjective correlation and value of any given metric goes down the more it is optimized for. The VMAF ML model would be quite different if it were trained on MOS scores of AV1 encoded content instead of just x264. Reference encoder comparisons have some value, and are the best we can do in early-stage codec development. But they are pretty limited in how accurately we can extrapolate real-world implementation capabilities. |
|
3rd July 2021, 17:51 | #428 | Link | ||
Artem S. Tashkinov
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 345
|
Some news:
1 Quote:
2 Quote:
|
||
6th July 2021, 19:12 | #431 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 117
|
I was originally upset at the new Cap for VVC and MCBA being too high, now I have done some napkins maths it turns out they were likely targeting some outliner like Apple or Samsung. But basically $0.5 per devices if you have a VVC logo. And that is excluding MPEG-LA terms.
__________________
Previously iwod |
6th July 2021, 19:43 | #432 | Link | |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,770
|
Quote:
|
|
10th July 2021, 14:46 | #433 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,126
|
the 1st vvc hardware decoder ip block has been announced: https://www.businesswire.com/news/ho...der-Silicon-IP
|
11th July 2021, 19:07 | #434 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 706
|
New player video YUView for VVC
https://ient.github.io/YUView/ |
12th July 2021, 16:58 | #435 | Link | |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,770
|
Quote:
|
|
12th July 2021, 18:57 | #436 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 706
|
Unofficial plugin for VLC player. I don't know if it works.
https://github.com/InterDigitalInc/VTMDecoder_VLCPlugin |
17th July 2021, 11:42 | #437 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,126
|
vvc royalty report by unified patents: https://www.scribd.com/document/5158...-Report-Public
|
17th July 2021, 19:10 | #438 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 117
|
Quote:
VVC FRAND per-unit Royalty Rate = $0.05. Basically they are saying Bandwidth cost has decreased so much the "value" of the codec over AVC / H.264 as anchor point as becomes negligible. I dont even know where to begin.
__________________
Previously iwod |
|
17th July 2021, 22:50 | #439 | Link | |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,770
|
Quote:
Also, the claimed compression efficiency advantages of AV1 really haven't been proven out with double-blind subjective evaluation with real-world encoding scenarios. Unified Patents does lots of important work, but I'm not so thrilled by this analysis. |
|
|
|