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. |
28th February 2013, 21:25 | #141 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 217
|
When you compare the situation with SACD and DVD-A, remember that the CD has practically surpassed human hearing and all of these formats don't offer any practical advantage.
Right now, people love streaming high resolution videos over the internet. The quality is usually so bad that I'd roughly compare it to audio cassettes. A new video codec that improves the bad quality of youtube videos could have a similar impact as the CD had. People are ready for it, even my non-tech-savvy friends stream 1080p videos from youtube every day. |
28th February 2013, 21:28 | #142 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 197
|
Quote:
Back then, my laptop couldn't handle H.264 properly. Do I buy a new laptop? No, I do so a few years later because it's a fully-functional laptop. Nowadays, my phone won't handle H.265. Do I buy a new phone? Well, yea duh, give me 8 months for my contract to end. That's the what the appliancization of hardware has led to, and with some of the biggest mobile players brawling for market share and carrier** support using whatever technological leverage they can, I doubt it'd even be possible to get any decent mobile gadget next year without H.265. **at least in the US, this will singlehandedly ensure quick and peaceful media progressions for the next cycle or two. They love, NEED, the efficiency. "Oh you don't have H.265? Why don't we put your gadget back in the corner over here." Last edited by Guest; 28th February 2013 at 22:34. Reason: 4 |
|
1st March 2013, 10:21 | #143 | Link |
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 6,782
|
I wish it was just as simple with Ogg Vorbis. Sometimes I wonder if a competitor pays for not mentioning it in the list of supported formats (I know several devices which support Ogg Vorbis audio, but their manufacturers don't advertize that).
Marketing will have an important impact. The MPEG-LA has the power. DivX had a little less. Xiph hardly any. The popularity does not reflect the results of technical comparisons regarding quality and efficiency... |
4th March 2013, 06:52 | #144 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 81
|
Not sure if that was posted here before, but some researchers (?) claim that h265 decoding can be done on an iPad for example.
http://www.v-net.tv/hevc-capable-devices-hit-1b-in-2012-ahead-of-standard/ Only needs a software update. I think once decent encoders become available, and if device support really comes that fast (though the question is if the encoding settings need to be reduced in order to make it playable...), h265 will be used. It is useful everywhere. My connection is not even good enough for 480p at YouTube (mostly I use 240...), so if they can pack in 480p in a 240p sized stream, that would be awesome. The 720p/1080p people stream on demand is not very good in quality, if the same bandwidth can give better quality, I think it'd be quite popular. |
5th March 2013, 01:29 | #146 | Link | |
/人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Russia
Posts: 643
|
Quote:
|
|
6th March 2013, 11:31 | #147 | Link | |
Angel of Night
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tangled in the silks
Posts: 9,559
|
Quote:
It's too bad, because I'd love it if it rolled out everywhere today, particularly the still image part. |
|
7th March 2013, 11:25 | #148 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,565
|
Fraunhofer HHI has presented a software HEVC decoder supporting Main and Main 10 profile on the CeBIT. Allegedly "a single core" is sufficient for 1080p50, "four cores" for 2160p50 (4k). (Their test sequences were really low bitrate, so take it with a grain of salt...)
http://www.hhi.fraunhofer.de/en/medi...2013.html?NL=0 http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldu...n-1817722.html (German, English auto translation) |
9th March 2013, 16:17 | #149 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,315
|
The situation around HEVC is different from H.264's 10 years ago.
Chipmakers were already prepraring HEVC acceleation. Hardware video decoder gets only small area of chip and today even mobile GPU are much more powerful than that. Considering that HEVC is 3-4 times more complex and that each new node (32 nm, 22nm... etc) gets 2x more power efficient, HEVC hardware decoding on 20-22 nm chip will consume the same amount of power as H.264 on 40-45 nm chip. Even 28 nm chips would have a long bttery life. As an example, the last Atom CPUs (32 nm) have no issues with harware decoding of Blu-Ray (H.264 High Profile). I have tried to play two Blu-Ray streams at the same time (or any other x264 encodes at high bitrate) on Atom N2600 (CPU+GPU TDP 3.5 W), zero dropped frames. Last edited by IgorC; 9th March 2013 at 16:19. |
17th March 2013, 23:45 | #150 | Link | |
Testeur de codecs
Join Date: May 2003
Location: France
Posts: 2,484
|
Quote:
__________________
Le Sagittaire ... ;-) 1- Ateme AVC or x264 2- VP7 or RV10 only for anime 3- XviD, DivX or WMV9 |
|
28th April 2013, 01:50 | #151 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 46
|
Quote:
BTW, for the person who mentioned royalties, I would say the MPEG-LA didn't get to where they are today by being stupid. Presuming there must be one of VP9 or Daala or something else (Intel/Real NGV perhaps?) which will be sufficiently improved over H264, even if not able to compete with H265, they have to be careful not to price themselves out of the market. As others have said, there are plenty of areas, particularly streaming videos and legal downloads where plenty of people would love to have smaller files or higher quality even for 1080p. Bandwidth is improving, but not that fast. |
|
1st May 2013, 13:42 | #152 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 90
|
Quote:
Do you know how long it takes to render a photorealistic image for some architecual design (what i partially do for a living), not to mention render special effects for some movie or an entire CG movie? It always makes me smile when i see some comments on here from ppl complaining about 2fps encodes on their laptops. A movie only needs to be encoded once for disc distribution. After that its just copies. So what even if it takes a whole weekend. Is that really such a big problem?? Sure, broadcasting and other areas where realtime encodes might be required is another story but i dont think thats the current target they have in mind. H264 is still more than capable (as mentioned many times here already). Its not because there is H265 that you suddenly arent allowed to use H264 anymore... And when the hardware catches up, switch to H265 if you want. Last edited by K.i.N.G; 1st May 2013 at 14:05. |
|
16th May 2013, 18:51 | #154 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 39
|
Quote:
Facts: 1. H.264 is still technically advanced--we're not talking about VCR or DVD quality, and to the best of my knowledge, very few people complain about well-encoded H.264 at 1080p. 4k, sure, whatever, but we're reaching a point of pretty significant diminishing returns, in my opinion. I don't get the impression the typical consumer cares. 2. H.264 has royalty issues. Those go away if you wait long enough. For how long are we planning on letting MPEG-LA hold companies over a barrel? At what point does optimizing along codecs no longer matter when bandwidth and storage space are consistently becoming less of an issue? (and if you think this is nonsense, consider nobody's really seriously cared about updating JPEG for a solid twenty years--because the savings simply don't justify the pain of updating the world) 3. Unlike previous codecs, H.264 really does enjoy an unprecedented amount of support. I cannot think of a previous format that is as ubiquitous. That alone makes it very hard to migrate away from: moving to something with effectively zero support while still maintaining support for old products isn't trivial. I think over time, yes, H.265 and/or VP8 and/or VP9 will enjoy hardware support, but given the proliferation of H.264...codified as a standard among Windows 7, OSX, iOS, android, blue-ray formats, and so on....that's going to be a lot more difficult than it's previously been, particularly given that the value-add (making already great looking video look....better?) is hard to communicate to a typical customer. My point really boils down to: there's a diminishing return on investment with these video codecs, particularly given some realities about royalties, network speeds, storage requirements and so forth. I feel we're already near it with H.264, and at some point....it's just a royalties carrot on a stick. Last edited by kidjan; 16th May 2013 at 18:55. |
|
16th May 2013, 19:20 | #155 | Link | |||||
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,770
|
Quote:
HEVC will also bring 10-bit decoding mainstream; a quality improvement that H.264 High Profile can't deliver at any bitrate. Quote:
Quote:
MPEG-2 will still be widely used alongside H.264 and HEVC throughout this decade. Quote:
Plus it's cheap to add another decoder to GPUs and processors, and getting cheaper every generation. Adding HEVC would increase device COGS by way less than higher clock speed or extra cores. The days of $100+ deadicated MPEG-2 cards is way gone. All video decoders take up a really small and shrinking area of the silicon on today's chips. Quote:
Honestly, the H.264 royalties are barely a rounding error compared to what a content delivery company pays for their encoders, service, staff to maintain them, bandwidth, etcetera. HEVC royalties could be 10x as much as H.264 and would still be a huge net payoff just from bandwidth and storage savings. The critical thing is that per-decoder license fees stay reasonable. |
|||||
16th May 2013, 20:47 | #156 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 707
|
I agree to an extent but I don't think the addressable market will be anywhere as big as with MPEG-2 or AVC. Only green-field deployments and 4K are going to use it for DTH broadcasting, though a few European governments are mandating it.
Only web (including mobile) are going to be big consumers of HEVC and arguably the web doesn't have serious video bandwidth restrictions anyway. ARPU for web video is very low anyway. HEVC won't bring 10-bit mainstream. There's a huge push against it from hardware manufacturers. Quote:
Last edited by kieranrk; 16th May 2013 at 20:50. |
|
16th May 2013, 21:00 | #157 | Link | ||||
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,770
|
Quote:
I think OTA is a pretty small and shrinking slice of viewership, though. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But video decoder license fees are a small fraction of a STB's cost, and are a lot higher and uncapped for MPEG-2 anyway. If license fees were a big deal, people would have stopped shipping MPEG-2 decode a long time ago (note that it's not in Win8 by default now). VC-1 and H.264 were both much, much cheaper at the time. |
||||
16th May 2013, 22:56 | #158 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 707
|
Quote:
In most of the world STBs last for ~10 years or so; Korea is the special case in that there is a short upgrade period. All the more so when people have a lot of PVR'd recordings that can't be easily moved between STB (Device specific DRM). Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by kieranrk; 16th May 2013 at 23:01. |
|||
|
|