[HD-DVD Challenge] MPEG2, VC-1 and H264 with real uncompressed source movie

[Inventive Software]

For the record, I can't do any encoding, as I dropped my laptop whilst it was running, and I think it killed the hard disk. Moral of the story: don't drop it. Ever.

[Dark Shikari]

The nice thing about Lagarith is that there's only one implementation. Compression is better as well.But if it doesn't work on an operating system that a large number of Doom9 members use, there's no point in using it. Of course, if you want to offer a port of Lagarith to ffmpeg, that'd be great.

[Inventive Software]

Hey, sounds like a project I could actually get done this summer! :D

[akupenguin]

The nice thing about Lagarith is that there's only one implementation.
There's only one implementation of ffvhuff too, some people just call it by the wrong name.

[benwaggoner]

Hey, sounds like a project I could actually get done this summer! :D
That would certainly be welcome. Given how long it's taking everyone to download my 15 GB clip via Torrent, I wouldn't want to give up ANY compression effciency :).

[Dark Shikari]

That would certainly be welcome. Given how long it's taking everyone to download my 15 GB clip via Torrent, I wouldn't want to give up ANY compression effciency :).Try FFV1 or H.264 lossless?

[Inventive Software]

FFV1 isn't exactly fast decoding, and the only H.264 implementation widely used is x264, which doesn't do RGB. ;)

[kolak]

That would certainly be welcome. Given how long it's taking everyone to download my 15 GB clip via Torrent, I wouldn't want to give up ANY compression effciency :).

Ben, use Cineform :)
It will shrink your video at least 5 times and keep very good quality (with 10bit if you need). Everyone can use free Cineform decoder (you have to only pay to encode it :))

Andrew

[benwaggoner]

Ben, use Cineform :)
It will shrink your video at least 5 times and keep very good quality (with 10bit if you need). Everyone can use free Cineform decoder (you have to only pay to encode it :))

Yeah, I considered that as well. I've been a big fan of CineForm for years.

I can't remember why I decided not to use it, actually...

[Inventive Software]

Cineform AFAIK isn't lossless.

[smok3]

cineform is not lossless, also 10bpc is not something we really need for testing codecs imho.

[CruNcher]

visual lossless yeah but then you could also use AVC as intermediate and get even better results and if you go that way then you could also do VC-1 intermediate 50 mbit in both cases should be fine, should easily beat VC-3 tough should fail beating VC-2, but those 3 would definietly be able to beat cineform & canopus HQ easily :) (VC-1,VC-2,AVC)

[kolak]

visual lossless yeah but then you could also use AVC as intermediate and get even better results and if you go that way then you could also do VC-1 intermediate 50 mbit in both cases should be fine, should easily beat VC-3 tough should fail beating VC-2, but those 3 would definietly be able to beat cineform & canopus HQ easily :) (VC-1,VC-2,AVC)

I wouldn't be so sure. Cineform is designed to replace uncompressed format and it does it quite well. It's I frame only, nicely optimized for multicore PCs, 8, 10, 12 (also 4:2:2 and 4:4:4) bit modes, supports metadata- it's more than just a codec.
In it's best mode (12bits, 4:4:4 mode) the quality is better than HDCAM SR (at bitrates around 400Mbit avg. for full HD). You can playback 4K on a decent machine- try to do it with AVC at 200Mbits and 4K resolution :)
AVC, VC-1 solution are more theoretical for now- Cineform is there and it works.

Canopus HQ is also great: extreamly fast, good quality at mostly 200Mbit for full HD, but it's 8bit only and doesn't offer full colour sampling.


Andrew

[kolak]

cineform is not lossless, also 10bpc is not something we really need for testing codecs imho.

No, but quality is a way good enough as a source for encoding at 25Mbits.
You need 10bit (or nicely optimized 8bit- Ben can do it :)) to see how codecs deal with gradients.

Andrew

[Golgot13]

In it's best mode (12bits, 4:4:4 mode) the quality is better than HDCAM SR (at bitrates around 400Mbit avg. for full HD). You can playback 4K on a decent machine- try to do it with AVC at 200Mbits and 4K resolution :)

Hi Andrew,

NHK (and many other) use for UHD AVC codec :) (no VC1 and others).
I'm not sure than Cineform or Canopus codec can support UHD
(7680×4320 P or I in H264 at 128Mbps, audio is 22.2 HE-AAC).

[Golgot13]

I need some help to share the video.
I can put it on special french server (like free.fr)
but I'm not sure all people will can donwload it quickly
(before the server remove the file).

[IgorC]

(7680×4320 P or I in H264 at 128Mbps, audio is 22.2 HE-AAC).
HE-AAC is more efficient than LC-AAC only up to 40-45 kbps per channel.

22.2 is supposed to be achieve at transparent bitrates (> 64 kbps per channel)

[Golgot13]

HE-AAC is more efficient than LC-AAC only up to 40-45 kbps per channel.

22.2 is supposed to be achieve at transparent bitrates (> 64 kbps per channel)

Some people will say that 128Mbps is too low for UHD video,
but it's to show a broadcast process by satellite
(so hardware satellite limitation...).
And it's same for audio 22.2.

[kolak]

Hi Andrew,

NHK (and many other) use for UHD AVC codec :) (no VC1 and others).
I'm not sure than Cineform or Canopus codec can support UHD
(7680×4320 P or I in H264 at 128Mbps, audio is 22.2 HE-AAC).

Cineform supports any resolution. Have anyone tried to playback 2K AVC at 200Mbit?
If I will have some time I'll make a test with AVC and 4K to see playback performance.

Andrew

[guada2]

Hello Golgot13 & IgorC,

Just a question:
Why use HE-AAC instead of HD-AAC?

[CruNcher]

@kolak
i have some 2k sources here to test most blue screen stuff but also some nice other scenes but no 4k unfortunately but nevertheless 4k is still rarely used if @ all in DI currently :P
but you also have to use a high performance decoder for that like CoreAVC if you would like to get nice results and you should start low @ the bottom without cabac as this would let the decoding speed suffer extremely in this intermediate scenario. I guess with CoreAVC and low profile overhead it should be no problem to reach the same decoding speed as Cineform with H.264 :)

[shon3i]

Hello Golgot13 & IgorC,

Just a question:
Why use HE-AAC instead of HD-AAC?
There is no such a ting as "HD-AAC" in MPEG-AAC standard, only HE-AAC and LC-AAC and some other which not interest now.

HE-AAC is more efficient than LC-AAC only up to 80-96kbps per channel, and for example in classic 5.1 multichannel encoding, HE-AAC should be used up to 256kbps.

[guada2]

@shon3i
Thank you for this clarification

Could you believe that this format should be used for pure audio?

[Golgot13]

Hi all,

I have a little problem to share the video on the web.
I must to use a Lossless codec...
The video will be on french website (like http://dl.free.fr ).

[kolak]

@kolak
i have some 2k sources here to test most blue screen stuff but also some nice other scenes but no 4k unfortunately but nevertheless 4k is still rarely used if @ all in DI currently :P
but you also have to use a high performance decoder for that like CoreAVC if you would like to get nice results and you should start low @ the bottom without cabac as this would let the decoding speed suffer extremely in this intermediate scenario. I guess with CoreAVC and low profile overhead it should be no problem to reach the same decoding speed as Cineform with H.264 :)

I've done some small test and 2K (I frames only) at 200Mbit was unplayable at all on my 8 core machine (neither on PS3 :) ) :(

Andrew

[ocal5]

NHK (and many other) use for UHD AVC codec :) (no VC1 and others).
I'm not sure than Cineform or Canopus codec can support UHD
(7680×4320 P or I in H264 at 128Mbps, audio is 22.2 HE-AAC).

NHK is using 4 // encoders to do that ; image is split. ( As far as I know, since I'm unable to find this information. Online documents say "1 encoder" )

[Golgot13]

NHK is using 4 // encoders to do that ; image is split. ( As far as I know, since I'm unable to find this information. Online documents say "1 encoder" )

Yes, it's true I saw many live demo, because there are no solution to decode it in realtime ;)
The problem are from chipset and CPU's power...

It's like H264 High422, there are no DVB feed in HD H264 which use it
because there's not solution (but it will change NTT chipset are available since May)