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. |
6th July 2020, 07:54 | #263 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 706
|
On the Astra 2E (28.2 ° E) satellite emission tests appeared in VVC compression, the future successor of the HEVC / H.265 standard. These experiments are conducted by the satellite operator SES and the French technology company ATEME specializing in solutions for the supply of video content.
At the moment, popular software is not ready to handle VVC streams. Therefore, it is not easy to preview the content. Satkurier.pl editors have managed to determine so much that the image itself is emitted at a rate of 20.55 Mbit / s - probably at a resolution of 8K. Although the audio track is reporting, it is not broadcast. Technical parameters: Astra 2E (28.2 ° E) tp. 14 (11.973 GHz, pol. V, SR: 31000, FEC: 9/10; DVB-S2 / 8PSK) New codec 2020.06.04 https://www.sendspace.com/file/3l7d6z Last edited by Jamaika; 6th July 2020 at 08:04. |
6th July 2020, 11:38 | #264 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 117
|
Quote:
In hindsight x264 was sort of the outliner, it sets the bar and expectation of a free encoder way too high. Dark Shikari was driving it with burning passion. And MulticoareWare are now more focused in ML, Al, DataScience type of business. ( Cant blame them since that is where the money are right now ) |
|
6th July 2020, 13:02 | #266 | Link |
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 6,782
|
Not before the specs are "final"? ... Are they?
_ PS: Oh, I just learned it is. Newsletter The licensing is promoted to be FRAND = "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory" ... we will see. Last edited by LigH; 6th July 2020 at 15:46. |
6th July 2020, 16:18 | #267 | Link |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,347
|
Except thats not up to them, but the hundreds of patent holders, who will manage to ruin it again, I'm sure. Getting every patent holder into one pool that they can actually guarantee fair terms for is unlikely.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders |
6th July 2020, 16:39 | #268 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 117
|
Quote:
So the single pool ( first part of the equation ) is done, getting out there terms is another matter though. Personally I think a decent terms would be $1 per devices for hardware encoder and decoder with "NO CAP". And free software implementation for decoding. ( Preferably with Image Format exemption. VVC as an image is ridiculously good at low bpp ) [1] https://www.mc-if.org/our-members |
|
6th July 2020, 16:47 | #269 | Link | |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,347
|
Quote:
30 something companies seems pretty low to cover all the patents, which would have large overlap with HEVC and even H.264 still. MPEG-LA had over 40 companies in the HEVC patent pool, and thats not including those that jumped to HEVC Advance. I hope they manage to make a fair and resonable situation happen, but knowing how many of those companies have behaved in the past, i'm not entirely confident.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders |
|
6th July 2020, 18:08 | #270 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 117
|
Quote:
And for the listed 3x Members in MC-IF, HEVC Advance is in there. As a matter of fact all of the current HEVC Pool are there. ( Velos, HEVC Advance, Fraunhofer) Along with Sisvel and United Patents, together there are well over a hundred companies represented and more. AFAIK, there has never been a larger list of companies joining together for video codec. Again, that is not to say they will agree on something. Or if the agreement will really be "reasonable" by other's definition. Finger Crossed. |
|
6th July 2020, 18:56 | #271 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,901
|
An official press release of VVC/ H.266 from Fraunhofer HHI
50% less bit rate for same quality of H.265 https://newsletter.fraunhofer.de/-vi...t/V44RELLZBp/1
__________________
Win 10 x64 (19042.572) - Core i5-2400 - Radeon RX 470 (20.10.1) HEVC decoding benchmarks H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all |
6th July 2020, 20:21 | #272 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,126
|
The Mpeg-LA said that HEVC had 50% better compression than h264 so i would take this claim with a pinch of salt. I'd be happy with 35% improvement.
VVC VTM 9.3 is out: https://vcgit.hhi.fraunhofer.de/jvet...VTM/-/releases Hopefully someone will do some extensive benchmarks using V9.3 comparing it to other codecs in terms of compression now that it has been ratified. Last edited by hajj_3; 6th July 2020 at 20:25. |
7th July 2020, 01:31 | #273 | Link | ||
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,770
|
Quote:
Quote:
One advantage of VVC over, say, AV1, is that a VVC encoder can start with a HEVC encoder without that much tweaking, and then VVC-specific features can be added. That's how x265 started. Last edited by benwaggoner; 7th July 2020 at 16:35. Reason: Added more details about older codecs' evolution. |
||
7th July 2020, 15:09 | #274 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 706
|
New codec 2020.07.07 v9.3
https://www.sendspace.com/file/i9uta6 |
9th July 2020, 17:32 | #275 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 196
|
Quote:
In that case HEVC came out a year earlier than VP9, and VP8 had gained little traction beyond Youtube at that point. This time AV1 has a 2 year lead, and several encoders both open and proprietary available with ASIC decoders trickling into the consumer marketplace. Despite not being at quality parity with libaom, SVT AV1 can do much faster than real time HD on a single socket system - I would expect that to improve even further well before performant and feature complete software VVC encoders are in the mainstream. |
|
9th July 2020, 18:02 | #276 | Link | ||
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,770
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
13th July 2020, 00:22 | #278 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 196
|
Quote:
The main HEVC encoder in use publicly is x265 - it's 8 years old now, and doesn't come close to the original MPEG promises for the codec, albeit HW265 does so clearly someone or several someones at MCW weren't giving it their A game. That is with them using x264 as a base to speed up initial development. Sure x265 can definitely do very well at low bitrates, but at high bitrates? Not so much. I've seen recent high bitrate HD encodes using both x264 and x265 at 10GB, and x265 definitely still has problems there. Meanwhile at 8 years old x264 had already categorically beaten the incumbent best codec Xvid. (or is that just my memory playing tricks on me?) Given that, either through laziness or lack of investment the x265 codec has actually shown slower development than x264. Even if your prediction comes true, and I am fairly pessimistic about those chances given the history of HEVC implementations and the different nature of the ML based techniques - even then, if AOM choose to use SVT as a base for AV2 development, it could launch far faster and more performant than AV1/VP9/VP8 did, and make VVC's reign far shorter than that of HEVC. From what I have seen in the experimental branch commits so far, AOM seem to be taking a similar ML guided/augmented take to VVC for AV2, and at least Google's talks at encoding summits certainly support that direction. So I don't think VVC will remain in the lead for fundamentally better technology for very long, to say nothing of the less than likely outcome of a salient licensing platform for VVC in the near future - and that isn't even getting into the mess of uncertainty that the EVC pushers have made on top of all of this. It seems almost like the proprietary codec pushers are actually trying to self destruct that path at this point, either through incompetence or greed, take your pick. To me it makes more sense for those still pushing the proprietary angle to pre pool their patents to license at a fixed rate per year to AOM so that this post standardisation licensing musical chairs can be cut off at the knees - that way everybody that wants to get paid can still be paid. I'm sure between the huge conjoined cash reserves of the main AOM members that they can work out an equitable fixed rate rather than waiting until the last year or 2 of a proprietary codec development to engage in a free for all. Last edited by soresu; 13th July 2020 at 00:26. |
|
13th July 2020, 00:31 | #279 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 196
|
Quote:
Because they purported to be exceeding libaom quality at faster speeds than x265 all the way back at the Big Apple event last year. If they weren't lying, I would assume that they would probably have improved it further still by now. |
|
13th July 2020, 04:47 | #280 | Link | |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,770
|
Quote:
I'm not suggesting there is anything specific to that vendor along those lines. But I personally haven't seen real-world longer-form content where AV1 is reliably superior to HEVC. AV1 encoders just don't (yet) have the breadth of psychovisual optimization across the huge range of sources and scenarios of the best HEVC encoders. One likely exception to that is very grainy/noisy content, as AV1 can remove grain on encoding and resynthesize it on on the decoder side. I've not seen a mature degrain-and-paramterize solution integrated into an AV1 encoder. But I anticipate a good one could beat HEVC for grainy content at moderate-low bitrates. Grain just takes so many bits, and HEVC simply doesn't have an equivalent tool. H.264 for HD-DVD also had a film grain sythesis feature. But the MIPS/pixel available 14 years ago were tiny compared to now - just degraining and parametrizing was a R&D thing, not production ready. And the synthesis model was a lot more primative, so the results couldn't be as fine tuned. |
|
|
|