Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloax
Well as of the current, my experience with VP9 is that encoding is glacial - and decoding either whines about lacking FPS settings (despite vpxenc.exe outright refusing to work if you use the --fps xx/--fps=xx switch) or just outright refuses to be output.
i must be doing something horribly wrong
except it's not told anywhere so joke's on them
|
I think it's just that VP9 and HEVC are really at similar development stages right now. If Google puts the productization resources into VP9 that HEVC is getting, the bitstream will get a good shake.
The risk is that, like with VP3-9, we'll see a potentially promising bitstream get hobbled by having on a single vendor focused on it with an unhealthy PSNR bias, competing with a whole lot of other companies making big bets on making the best implementation for particular scenarios of the mainstream MPEG/ITU codec.
Single-developer codecs have been successful in the past; RealVideo and Windows Media did quite well in their eras, and certainly help their own and more versus MPEG-4 Part 2. But things were different with H.264. Momentum begats momentum, and when you have 90% of the world's best encoder developers focused on a particular bitstream, implementations get better fast.
I believe that if Microsoft had a sustained, coordinated effort around improving VC-1 after 2007 it would have remained quite competitive for some time (dynamic frame resizing was a hugely effective feature and much more friendly for software decoders than H.264's expensive in-loop deblocking). But there weren't any other companies in the wings to take lead in implementation when Microsoft progressively disbanded the Digitial Media Division and its component parts until there was simply no center of excellence for digital media instead Microsoft; just a lot of little teams solving their own local problems with the staff at hand and with very little coordination.
A successful VP9 will see multiple third parties competing hard to make the best implementation for particular scenarios of note. Even if it had a bitstream with 10% more raw potential, real-world results from having 10 focused encoding companies trying to make HEVC better would easily swamp that 10%. Psychovisual and scenario-specific tuning can drive 50% efficiency improvements in a couple of years.