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 3rd February 2018, 15:20   #421  |  Link
IgorC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwod View Post
3000x slower.
Duh, like reference H.265 encoder (HM) was any faster.
IgorC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd February 2018, 20:04   #422  |  Link
iwod
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorC View Post
Duh, like reference H.265 encoder (HM) was any faster.
It was, if I remember correctly only 50 - 100 times slower. Order of Magnitude less then AV1.
iwod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 08:33   #423  |  Link
Anthonytex
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 4
So, not ready yet:
https://youtu.be/6UksCRCl_bI
"Almost"
Anthonytex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 12:24   #424  |  Link
bstrobl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 52
Looks like they are cleaning up all the little niggles in the bitstream which is good A couple additional weeks for a potentially long lasting codec is fine.
bstrobl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2018, 13:59   #425  |  Link
iwod
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by bstrobl View Post
Looks like they are cleaning up all the little niggles in the bitstream which is good A couple additional weeks for a potentially long lasting codec is fine.
How about months? At least Mozilla and Xiph are doing those works and many other member. If it was Google i dont know what mess it will end up with.
iwod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2018, 16:50   #426  |  Link
iwod
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthonytex View Post
So, not ready yet:
https://youtu.be/6UksCRCl_bI
"Almost"
You just have to watch this video and wonder, even at this what is supposed to be late stage development, there are still LOTs of big changes.
iwod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2018, 18:44   #427  |  Link
mzso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwod View Post
You just have to watch this video and wonder, even at this what is supposed to be late stage development, there are still LOTs of big changes.
Better than having a format with huge bugs/issues.
mzso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2018, 12:03   #428  |  Link
bstrobl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwod View Post
How about months? At least Mozilla and Xiph are doing those works and many other member. If it was Google i dont know what mess it will end up with.
I'm afraid this is not going to be the perfect codec we are looking for. Lots of compromises (old tools kept due to hardware vendor demands and VP9 legacy etc.) due to the time frame and a lot of tools simply not being integrated. The AOM is still at a pretty young age right now, but it is better to ship an imperfect but very good codec rather than delaying another few years and miss overtaking HEVC and VP9.

AV2 is going to have far fewer compromises simply because there will be more time (10 years?), especially once the kinks in organisation within AOM have been worked out and at that stage any major gains will have to be gotten from better tools and architecture rather than stuffing more things into it. It may be possible that more radical ideas will be used including some sort of hybrid codec like OPUS (AV1 and Daala hybrid perhaps?).

Compromise is key here. As long as the bitstream is solid and no massive bugs are left it should do well.
bstrobl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2018, 16:52   #429  |  Link
Q3CPMA
Registered User
 
Q3CPMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 25
After seeing the FOSDEM video, I mosty agree with the previous posts: too much and too big changes for an "almost" finished codec and hardware decoding dumbing down the codec. They could have simply made a profile for hardware decoding and one for software to solve all of this. Kind of like AAC.
Q3CPMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2018, 16:54   #430  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q3CPMA View Post
They could have simply made a profile for hardware decoding and one for software to solve all of this.
That solves nothing. Any consumer media would never use those features that don't work with hardware, so its wasted effort to even consider them.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2018, 17:36   #431  |  Link
mzso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q3CPMA View Post
and hardware decoding dumbing down the codec. They could have simply made a profile for hardware decoding and one for software to solve all of this. Kind of like AAC.
Well, we might be better off having a somewhat simpler and conventional format (with substantial improvements) now that can be adopted easily and quickly and then have a revolutionary one years later. A proper new format that throws away all baggage and conventions probably takes several years to produce anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
That solves nothing. Any consumer media would never use those features that don't work with hardware, so its wasted effort to even consider them.
That's kind of surprising. I'd expect even from smartphones of the past few years to decode FullHD content on CPU power alone.
mzso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2018, 19:19   #432  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by mzso View Post
That's kind of surprising. I'd expect even from smartphones of the past few years to decode FullHD content on CPU power alone.
I'm not sure if they could, don't have final decode complexity figures yet, but even if they can it would burn much more battery then using a bitstream that can be hardware decoded, so its far from ideal.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2018, 20:49   #433  |  Link
Q3CPMA
Registered User
 
Q3CPMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
That solves nothing. Any consumer media would never use those features that don't work with hardware, so its wasted effort to even consider them.
Yeah, the industry would probably only use the hardware profile. But a codec that's supposed to replace almost all other codecs might be used for archiving too. I'm not even talking about encoding done by individuals where something like h264's high10 got some use.
Q3CPMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 10:52   #434  |  Link
Djfe
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 19
I guess it comes to the point, that the companies involved want working hardware decoders rather sooner than later. So saving time on implementing hardware decoders is a huge deal. the question, I cannot answer, is: how much better could hardware decoders get, if they make them from scratch? (in other words. is it worth the effort?)

One actual question, I have, is, are Xiph/Mozilla still working on Daala? (will Daala ship on it's own one day?)
Not that I want that to happen. One codec is better than several. But it's interesting to know, whether they still consider doing it for some reason

About: http://blog.chiariglione.org/a-crisi...nd-a-solution/
Nice read, thx for sharing it
Moving away from profiles to tool-based encoders doesn't seem to be a good option(IMO), since it complicates the encoder/decoder situation a lot more
especially since all tools have to work together somehow.

it's kind of stupid though, that big parts of the industry only saw their own profits instead of the bigger picture.
well, it's their own pile of shards now.
AOM has chances to win.

I wonder what the broadcast industry will choose in 15-30 years. Or the movie making industry, in-case there is a new type of disc format. ^^

About his last paragraph:
Do we actually need a better, new codec after av1 and opus for media?
(at least on the web, the web needed an open codec for several reasons, even if the model of implementing such a codec isn't profitabel at first
this might not keep broadcasters and the media industry and so on from paying royalties for better codecs; they have the perfect business model to do so after all (unlike the web))
Djfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 11:06   #435  |  Link
Quikee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q3CPMA View Post
But a codec that's supposed to replace almost all other codecs might be used for archiving too.
Look at the companies behind AOM and tell me which one of them cares about archiving? I don't even remember it being mentioned as a use case for netvc. And also when did they say that the coded is supposed to "replace almost all other codecs"? I thought that AV1 main focus was clear - internet streaming (including game content) and internet real-time communications.
Quikee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 13:18   #436  |  Link
mzso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quikee View Post
Look at the companies behind AOM and tell me which one of them cares about archiving? I don't even remember it being mentioned as a use case for netvc. And also when did they say that the coded is supposed to "replace almost all other codecs"? I thought that AV1 main focus was clear - internet streaming (including game content) and internet real-time communications.
That doesn't mean it can't be used for everything else. Especially since it's free and supposedly superior to all contemporary lossy codecs.
Also, it seems to me that there's a shift towards the internet from discs and such and television broadcasts.

Last edited by mzso; 9th February 2018 at 13:22.
mzso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2018, 12:27   #437  |  Link
tfouto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quikee View Post
Look at the companies behind AOM and tell me which one of them cares about archiving? I don't even remember it being mentioned as a use case for netvc. And also when did they say that the coded is supposed to "replace almost all other codecs"? I thought that AV1 main focus was clear - internet streaming (including game content) and internet real-time communications.
How can it be used for internet real-time communications, when the encoding is really expensive?

Last edited by tfouto; 12th February 2018 at 12:31.
tfouto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2018, 13:44   #438  |  Link
Quikee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by tfouto View Post
How can it be used for internet real-time communications, when the encoding is really expensive?
Turning off expensive coding tools, limiting search, optimization, hardware encoders,...

AV1 didn't see much optimizations yet and they AFAIK always do full search for new coding tools, which is similar to having placebo mode all the time on.
Quikee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th February 2018, 20:22   #439  |  Link
LigH
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
 
LigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 5,787
AOM 0.1.0-8039-g01faff973
__________________

New German Gleitz board
MediaFire: x264 | x265 | VPx | AOM | Xvid
LigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th February 2018, 01:55   #440  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by mzso View Post
Well, we might be better off having a somewhat simpler and conventional format (with substantial improvements) now that can be adopted easily and quickly and then have a revolutionary one years later. A proper new format that throws away all baggage and conventions probably takes several years to produce anyway.

That's kind of surprising. I'd expect even from smartphones of the past few years to decode FullHD content on CPU power alone.
Premium content requires HW DRM which means HW decode. A SW-only codec may get used by hobbyists, but won't be by the content industry.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner 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 17:53.


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