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 19th January 2019, 09:18   #1381  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by zub35 View Post
benwaggoner If the codec will always be so slow to encode on x86 CPUs, then this encoder will be exclusively for large companies that are capable of acquiring a HW encoder.
It's not completely set in stone, but I really believe H.264/AVC might be the last codec easily encodable in pure x86/x64. lntel and AMD have agreed on some extensions to make H.265/HEVC and AV1 not suck quite as much, but the obvious direction is in GPU or fixed-function encoding.
__________________
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th January 2019, 10:01   #1382  |  Link
hajj_3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxyshadis View Post
lntel and AMD have agreed on some extensions to make H.265/HEVC and AV1 not suck quite as much
source?
hajj_3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2019, 02:20   #1383  |  Link
alex1399
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 47
I think that is the reason H.264/AVC ditched some complicated features whether they can be implemented by hardware decoder or not. In some extensions, heavy taxing on cpu loading from software encoding perspective is quite possible.
alex1399 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2019, 07:23   #1384  |  Link
Gravitator
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 166
How do I beat a pulsating noise?
I need to save/delete it across the entire sample (using the AOM settings).
> Encoded sample
> Original sample
Quote:
aomenc --passes=2 --pass=1 --target-bitrate=800 --end-usage=vbr --fpf="PATH TO THE .stats FILE" --profile=0 --cpu-used=6 --min-q=0 --max-q=63 --bias-pct=70 --minsection-pct=15 --maxsection-pct=10000 --lag-in-frames=25 --drop-frame=0 --undershoot-pct=0 --overshoot-pct=0 --buf-sz=6 --buf-initial-sz=4 --buf-optimal-sz=5 --drop-frame=0 --kf-min-dist=0 --kf-max-dist=250 --auto-alt-ref=1 --arnr-maxframes=7 --arnr-strength=5 --noise-sensitivity=0 --sharpness=0 --static-thresh=0 --tune-content=default --tile-columns=0 --tile-rows=0 --aq-mode=0 --min-gf-interval=0 --max-gf-interval=0 --threads=2 --width=1920 --height=816 --i420 --input-bit-depth=10 --bit-depth=10 --row-mt=0 --cdf-update-mode=1 -o NUL -

aomenc --passes=2 --pass=2 --target-bitrate=800 --end-usage=vbr --fpf="PATH TO THE .stats FILE" --profile=0 --cpu-used=6 --min-q=0 --max-q=63 --bias-pct=70 --minsection-pct=15 --maxsection-pct=10000 --lag-in-frames=25 --drop-frame=0 --undershoot-pct=0 --overshoot-pct=0 --buf-sz=6 --buf-initial-sz=4 --buf-optimal-sz=5 --drop-frame=0 --kf-min-dist=0 --kf-max-dist=250 --auto-alt-ref=1 --arnr-maxframes=7 --arnr-strength=5 --noise-sensitivity=0 --sharpness=0 --static-thresh=0 --tune-content=default --tile-columns=0 --tile-rows=0 --aq-mode=0 --min-gf-interval=0 --max-gf-interval=0 --threads=2 --width=1920 --height=816 --i420 --input-bit-depth=10 --bit-depth=10 --row-mt=0 --cdf-update-mode=1 -o OUTPUTFILE -
__________________
Win10x64, Xeon E5450, GTX 750 2GB, DDR3 8GB.
Gravitator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st January 2019, 18:26   #1385  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxyshadis View Post
It's not completely set in stone, but I really believe H.264/AVC might be the last codec easily encodable in pure x86/x64. lntel and AMD have agreed on some extensions to make H.265/HEVC and AV1 not suck quite as much, but the obvious direction is in GPU or fixed-function encoding.

HEVC is certainly encodable on x64, although 32-bit becomes impractical at high quality at very high frame sizes. The trend for even live encoding has been towards highly multithreaded CPU encoding. Fixed-function ASIC style hardware is too inflexible when there are SO many options for how to encode every block, with lots of psychovisual tuning to be done. The more complex codecs get, the more high quality encoders are on CPU. And arithmetic entropy coding really benefits from peak single-thread performance. I think there is hope for hybrid CPU/GPU/ASIC/FPGA models, but I donít see professional quality encoding not to heavily use CPU anytime soon.

I donít think there is anything intrinsically hard about AV1 for software encoding. If anything SW encoding could be easier than HW encoding due to parallelization limitations. The bigger issue is that VPx hasnít had a truly competitive quality @ perf encoder in YEARS. And a reference encoder isnít a great starting point, which libaom sort of is. If one wanted to build a quality @ perf optimized encoder from scratch, especially for low latency live encoding, Iíd start by just implementing the mandatory features of a bitstream and then add features incrementally, seeing what their quality @ perf is. Starting with an encoder that HAS to use ALL codec features like a reference encoder does can be harder than going front the ground up.


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

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st January 2019, 18:30   #1386  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by hajj_3 View Post
rav1e is a reasonably fast encoder, it can do several fps and will get faster with time.



Also youtube won't be the only ones adopting this. Facebook, bbc iplayer, netflix etc and many others will be adopting this.

Do we have data on quality @ perf @ bitrate?

Itís pretty easy to make a fast encoder. But making one that is fast and produces competitive quality at a given bitrate is a lot harder.

AV1 is new enough that I donít expect encoders to give us a clear sense of what the potential quality @ perf for the bitstream is yet. There is a lot of quality and perf optimization to be in the ballpark to compare.


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

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th January 2019, 22:13   #1387  |  Link
utack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 38
A new Speech on AV1 by Tim Terriberry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qubPzBcYCTw
utack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2019, 01:22   #1388  |  Link
Nintendo Maniac 64
Registered User
 
Nintendo Maniac 64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by utack View Post
A new Speech on AV1 by Tim Terriberry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qubPzBcYCTw
Kind of amusing that, for something about new fancy-pants video codecs, the video itself has telecine judder (it's been telecine'd from 25fps to 30fps).
__________________
____HTPC____  | __Desktop PC__
2.93GHz Xeon x3470 (4c/8t Nehalem) | 4.6GHz Pentium G3258 (2c/2t Haswell)
Radeon HD5870  | Intel iGPU      
2x2GB+2x1GB DDR3-1333 | 4x4GB DDR3-1600       

Win7 x64
Nintendo Maniac 64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2019, 07:07   #1389  |  Link
TomV
VP Strategy, Beamr
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by utack View Post
A new Speech on AV1 by Tim Terriberry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qubPzBcYCTw
Tim is a smart engineer, but engineers typically aren't well equipped to present legal opinions / advice (from 2 min to 9 min). Nobody pays for patents twice. If you license from both MPEG LA and HEVC Advance, the companies that are in both only get paid once. The patent chart Tim is using is out of date and inaccurate. Fraunhofer sold their patents to GE, which is why GE has HEVC patents. Canon licenses their patents through MPEG LA. Velos Media has told hundreds of companies what they charge, and they've signed many companies to their license program.

The truth is that every competitive device that supports video now supports HEVC in hardware. Billions of devices, with billions more sold each year. Most every TV, smartphone, tablet or connected set-top box (including Google Chromecast Ultra). If the patent situation were really untenable, Apple, Samsung, LG, Sony, Amazon, Google, GoPro, Roku and hundreds of other device OEMs wouldn't be incorporating HEVC in their devices. And we wouldn't be watching 4K HDR HEVC movies from Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Vudu, and Apple. If you want another perspective, I gave a talk at the SF Video meetup on the topic... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgE8-4rcXl0

The Alliance for Open Media isn't the only group working to deal with the difficulties of licensing patents for industry standards. MPEG is dealing with it. The Media Coding Industry Forum is dealing with it. And outside firms like Unified Patents, with their Video Codec Zone (specifically focused on HEVC) are dealing with it. It's an ongoing challenge (both for HEVC and for new standards in development), but it's being dealt with.

On the other hand, I'm blazing along at less than 1 frame per minute of 1080P with aomenc cpu-used=1 on a fast Core i7-7820X (with hyperthreading disabled, for the fastest possible single-threaded performance). The resulting videos are roughly on par with my HEVC encodes at identical bit rates (sometimes better, but very often worse). They're clean, but soft and lacking detail.

Last edited by TomV; 25th January 2019 at 07:11.
TomV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2019, 21:10   #1390  |  Link
TD-Linux
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
Do we have data on quality @ perf @ bitrate
Here's a link to AWCY as shown in Tim's presentation:

https://beta.arewecompressedyet.com/...y-525f981376bd

tl;dr it is better than x264 at every bitrate, but still worse that libvpx VP9. It is also currently about 10x slower than x264, which is blazing fast compared to libaom but still has a lot of room for improvement.
TD-Linux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2019, 21:56   #1391  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,843
AWCY doesn’t include any metrics that are well demonstrated to be able to finely discriminate between quality of different encoders and codecs. VMAF is the least-bad we’ve ever had, but can still be off quite a bit for individual clips, especially if the use codec features or psychovisual optimizations that weren’t included in their test clips. For example, VMAF is bad at rating effectiveness of low-Luna adaptive quant, I speculate because they didn’t include any clips that used different ways to do that in their testing. VMAF is a very impressive effort, but it is not magic. Like all machine learning aystems, it tried to predict what a human would answer given complex input, based on a. large set of example inputs and answers. But I’d it doesn’t have human input for some kinds of inputs, the validity of its predicted ratings for those inputs is unpredictable at best.

Also, the value of mean or even harmonic mean of per-frame scores is limited for clips much more than 10 seconds. A movie encoded in CBR and a VBR encode at the same ABR might up with the same mean score per frame, but the VBR would be strongly preferred by viewers as it offers consistent quality, with the worse sections being a lot better than the worst in a CBR encode.

Comparing psychovisual optimizations, rate control, and significantly different encoders tools requires subjective double-one testing before any confidence in objective meassures’ applicability.

Net-net: you can’t know how good video looks without real people looking at it when techniques are used that weren’t incorporated in an objective metric. If we see a high correlation between MOS and VMAF for a new technique/codec, then we can start trusting that metric.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th January 2019, 14:30   #1392  |  Link
utack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 38
Does anyone know what the deal with Qualcomm is?
Is the YouTube rollout and Netfix talk pushing them towards making a hardware decoder, or do they have some interests in MPEG doing well and will try to delay AV1 support in phones for a while?
utack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2019, 17:25   #1393  |  Link
Djfe
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 23
A rendered 8k video on YouTube with lots of flickering (epilepsy warning), details like rain drops on a helmet etc.
https://youtu.be/fOWsamMv_v4
Maybe good for comparing av1 to vp9 on YouTube (up to 480p currently)
Once YouTube gets better encoders anyways

obvious already: more blurred but definitely less blocky and less obvious artifacts)
1:30min into the video is probably the best place to compare (and the hardest part for their av1 implementation so far at that bitrate)
Djfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2019, 19:37   #1394  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djfe View Post
A rendered 8k video on YouTube with lots of flickering (epilepsy warning), details like rain drops on a helmet etc.
https://youtu.be/fOWsamMv_v4
Maybe good for comparing av1 to vp9 on YouTube (up to 480p currently)
Once YouTube gets better encoders anyways

obvious already: more blurred but definitely less blocky and less obvious artifacts)
1:30min into the video is probably the best place to compare (and the hardest part for their av1 implementation so far at that bitrate)
Are you getting at AV1 encode at 480p and below somehow? It shows as VP9 for me at every bitrate (using Chrome).

That is a very interesting clip from a compression perspective. It'll really stress weighted prediction (all those strobes) and adaptive quantization (intense variation in frequency distribution). Tons of value from intraframe prediction.

The VP9 encode is not doing well; at 8K scaled down to my 4K monitor there's lots of blocking and banding issues on the guy. I don't have an immediate intuition for how much is limitations in VP9 versus libvpx. That's a kind of content not in the standard libraries of clips encoders get tuned against.

I would expect libaom to do pretty well against it at a slow preset, as libaom is doing a pretty broad mode search with its myriad tools. So it might find lots of oddball methods that work well with this clip. Probably a big gap between slower and faster modes.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2019, 19:51   #1395  |  Link
Nintendo Maniac 64
Registered User
 
Nintendo Maniac 64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
Are you getting at AV1 encode at 480p and below somehow? It shows as VP9 for me at every bitrate (using Chrome).
Don't you have to opt into using AV1 on YouTube?


Anyway, I can definitely confirm via youtube-dl that AV1 (listed as av01) encodes do in fact exist for that video at 480p resolution and lower:

__________________
____HTPC____  | __Desktop PC__
2.93GHz Xeon x3470 (4c/8t Nehalem) | 4.6GHz Pentium G3258 (2c/2t Haswell)
Radeon HD5870  | Intel iGPU      
2x2GB+2x1GB DDR3-1333 | 4x4GB DDR3-1600       

Win7 x64
Nintendo Maniac 64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2019, 19:57   #1396  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendo Maniac 64 View Post
Don't you have to opt into using AV1 on YouTube?


Anyway, I can definitely confirm via youtube-dl that AV1 (listed as av01) encodes do in fact exist for that video at 480p resolution and lower:
Yes, it can be set here: https://www.youtube.com/testtube

Now I need to figure out how to do side/by/side in different codecs. Worth comparing to the x264 encodes as well.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2019, 20:51   #1397  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by utack View Post
Does anyone know what the deal with Qualcomm is?
Is the YouTube rollout and Netfix talk pushing them towards making a hardware decoder, or do they have some interests in MPEG doing well and will try to delay AV1 support in phones for a while?
I donít know anything about Qualcomm specifically, but it can take quite a while to go from final spec to design to tape-out to samples to full-scale fab to products launching with a new SoC.

It was being generally discussed in the industry that AV1ís bitstream finalization delays caused chipmakers to miss the 2019 product design window. A HW accelerated decoder is a lot more flexible, but fixed-function decoder needs to be RIGHT. Small product flaws can wind up impact the entire industry for years. And the combination of video decode and DRM is complex with very high functional requirements.

And Iíve heard that implementing AV1 in hardware is more complex than anticipated, due to relatively low parallelism opportunities and how many discreet tools can get applied to any given pixel. Getting a decoder running on a low-power chip is quite diffeeenr than with 1-2 very fast x64 threads. Say what you will about the MPEG process, but it is good at constraining decode complexity for software and hardware.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2019, 22:39   #1398  |  Link
Nintendo Maniac 64
Registered User
 
Nintendo Maniac 64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
Now I need to figure out how to do side/by/side in different codecs.
Download each individual video stream via youtube-dl and then play them back in their own video player program window?
__________________
____HTPC____  | __Desktop PC__
2.93GHz Xeon x3470 (4c/8t Nehalem) | 4.6GHz Pentium G3258 (2c/2t Haswell)
Radeon HD5870  | Intel iGPU      
2x2GB+2x1GB DDR3-1333 | 4x4GB DDR3-1600       

Win7 x64
Nintendo Maniac 64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th January 2019, 17:28   #1399  |  Link
alex1399
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 47
libavfilter could be utilized to perform some sort of [0:v]crop=in_w/2:in_h:0:0[VL];[1:v]crop=in_w/2:in_h:in_w/2:0[VR];[VL][VR]hstack stuff
alex1399 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th January 2019, 22:39   #1400  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
AWCY doesn’t include any metrics that are well demonstrated to be able to finely discriminate between quality of different encoders and codecs. VMAF is the least-bad we’ve ever had, but can still be off quite a bit for individual clips, especially if the use codec features or psychovisual optimizations that weren’t included in their test clips.
Isn't there also the possibility that there's a sort of implicit "training" for this metric included in one codec/encoder and not the other?

I don't know whether VMAF was used in some x265 tuning, but given the age of all the significant parts of x264 codebase, I am fairly sure that there has been no attempts to do this.

Meanwhile VMAF was IIRC used during development of Daala and AV1 and maybe AOMenc/Rav1e? In that case, there could be some inherent bias in the metric towards those codecs that would then add some imaginary advantage above their real compression quality into the numbers, when measured by VMAF. Simply because their output was implicitly tuned to get better VMAF, because VMAF was used to test new tools/analysis/RDO and so on.
mandarinka 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 14:50.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.