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 16th August 2012, 00:09   #1  |  Link
Seraphic-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 698
New video-compression (HEVC) twice as efficient as current standards.

Don't think this has been posted, but a The Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) has met to issue a draft international standard of a new video-compression format called High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) that is twice as efficient as current H.264/AVC standards.

Links Below:

http://www.ericsson.com/news/120814_mpeg_244159018_c

http://stevencrowley.com/2012/08/14/...es-efficiency/
Attached Images
 

Last edited by Seraphic-; 16th August 2012 at 00:18.
Seraphic- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 04:44   #2  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,234
Won't be out for a while. One of the issues is that HEVC will require much more processing power than H.264 to achieve the stated benefit. H264 will be around for a while yet!

That said, it's always good to know something new is around the corner, and this will come in very handy for future high definition standards beyond 1920x1080.
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 05:02   #3  |  Link
Blue_MiSfit
Derek Prestegard IRL
 
Blue_MiSfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,695
The devil is in the implementation. Even if the standard is formally completed in the next year or so, I'd be quite surprised if we see really good encoders and wide support within 3-5 years. The industry invested heavily in MPEG-2 in the mid-late 90s, mainly to support digital transmission in SD. They again invested heavily into H.264 in the mid '00s, mainly to support big deployments of HD. That being said, there's still TONS of MPEG-2 around.

I'd say mid to late '10s would be a reasonable time to expect mature HEVC based standards (in the sense of ATSC / DVB-S2 scope standards) to become reasonably commonplace. The question is, what will drive HEVC adoption? UHDTV doesn't seem like it will catch on any time soon, 3D is handled reasonably well by H.264, and current systems are "good enough" for most purposes. Unless broadcasters have a strong desire to reduce bitrates to increase channel counts, I have a hard time seeing a big push towards a new standard - especially considering the massive infrastructure built around MPEG-2 and H.264.

Oh yeah, and of course HEVC is massively more computationally expensive.

Derek

Last edited by Blue_MiSfit; 16th August 2012 at 05:05.
Blue_MiSfit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 05:30   #4  |  Link
iwod
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 757
I think we discuss it partially @ http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=165596&page=2

Although it is good we have a separate thread for it.

Some news site state a total of 500 patents designed for HEVC. I always wondered how much more expensive it is to buy out all the HEVC patents then 160 million for vp8.

Someone state HEVC is not H.265, while Wiki refers to both. Which is correct?

I was reading CABAC for HEVC is actually computationally less expensive then H.264 CABAC. What could theoretically means main profile to be better suited for mobile usage? Although i am not sure if the efficiency is worth the implementation effort on both hardware and software. As most of today Mobile H.264 usage are still stuck at wither Baseline ( o.O ) or Mainline profile.

Then we need x264 devs or some other teams to develop a decent encoder for it. Since x264 codebase could be adopted for x263 and xvp8 i wonder if xhevc is theoretically possible.
iwod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 06:47   #5  |  Link
nm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 2,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_MiSfit View Post
The question is, what will drive HEVC adoption? UHDTV doesn't seem like it will catch on any time soon, 3D is handled reasonably well by H.264, and current systems are "good enough" for most purposes. Unless broadcasters have a strong desire to reduce bitrates to increase channel counts, I have a hard time seeing a big push towards a new standard - especially considering the massive infrastructure built around MPEG-2 and H.264.
I think IPTV and other internet broadcasting needs might drive it forward. That's a paradigm shift happening right now in many countries.
nm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 08:31   #6  |  Link
vivan
/人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Russia
Posts: 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwod View Post
As most of today Mobile H.264 usage are still stuck at wither Baseline ( o.O ) or Mainline profile.
Everything now supports at least 720p High@L3.1. Except tegra 2.
vivan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 08:59   #7  |  Link
Audionut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,270
By the time HEVC becomes usable, computational requirements won't matter because processing power will be so much more in the future.

Exactly the same as when H.264 standards were introduced. Everyone complained it was so slow and required so much extra processing power (over MPEG-2, MPEG-4). And yet 8 years later we all thoroughly enjoy x264.
It honestly wasn't that long ago that all but a few extreme processors could process HD material in real-time with H.264.
__________________
http://www.7-zip.org/
Audionut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 09:19   #8  |  Link
Blue_MiSfit
Derek Prestegard IRL
 
Blue_MiSfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,695
@Audionut: This is definitely true when we're talking about software encoding and decoding on things as beefy as desktop PCs and servers. Embedded hardware is another story altogether. There's a whole lot of MPEG-2 and H.264 set top boxes / IRDs out there!

I'm not doubting that we'll ultimately all be using HEVC. It's just going to take a long time.
Blue_MiSfit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 09:43   #9  |  Link
Audionut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_MiSfit View Post
There's a whole lot of MPEG-2 and H.264 set top boxes / IRDs out there!
And it was exactly the same when H.264 was finalized.

It was all MPEG-2/MPEG4-part 2. And everyone complained because it required to much processing power, and there were no devices that support it for years.

Quote:
I'm not doubting that we'll ultimately all be using HEVC. It's just going to take a long time.
Which is exactly what I have been saying.
__________________
http://www.7-zip.org/
Audionut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 09:56   #10  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwod View Post
Someone state HEVC is not H.265, while Wiki refers to both. Which is correct?
HEVC is the MPEG group design and designation, h.265 is the ITU-T designation. It is being worked on by both consortiums, and as such both names are correct.

It is no different to h.264 and AVC (Mpeg 4 AVC/MPEG-4 Part 10), just h.264 is the 'winning' name. I guess it sounds better than saying Mpeg-4 Part 10! This was also designed by the same consortium, with h.264 being the ITU-T name and the MPEG 4 Part 10/AVC name the MPEG name.
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 12:05   #11  |  Link
ckmox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 136
i actually posted this on the news area but the post is not yet approve blehh

but here is what i posted for more references
Quote:
H265 will half the video filesizes of H264 videos or H265 offers higher resolution at same filesizes as todays H264 videos and we might see H265 as early as 2013

source:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/15/m...ideo-standard/
http://phys.org/news/2012-08-mpeg-codec-halves-bit.html
ckmox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 12:15   #12  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwod View Post
Some news site state a total of 500 patents designed for HEVC. I always wondered how much more expensive it is to buy out all the HEVC patents then 160 million for vp8.
These 500 patents belong to a pool: several "founders" agree on a new standard, and put together their patents, while the benefits are split according to the initial agreement. Newcomers are issued generic licence fees for all the technologies they need (and covered by those patents). One cannot buy all of them, as this will drive all the founders away from their technology, but supposing one does, he has to invest billions and billions $.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwod View Post
Someone state HEVC is not H.265, while Wiki refers to both. Which is correct?
The correct version is what MPEG says.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 12:59   #13  |  Link
Guest
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 21,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckmox View Post
i actually posted this on the news area but the post is not yet approve blehh
Discussion is not allowed in News threads, so IMHO that was not a good choice.
Guest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 14:20   #14  |  Link
kurt
sidekick
 
kurt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: old Europe
Posts: 610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audionut View Post
By the time HEVC becomes usable, computational requirements won't matter because processing power will be so much more in the future.

Exactly the same as when H.264 standards were introduced. Everyone complained it was so slow and required so much extra processing power (over MPEG-2, MPEG-4). And yet 8 years later we all thoroughly enjoy x264.
It honestly wasn't that long ago that all but a few extreme processors could process HD material in real-time with H.264.
I checked wikipedia on H264 and the final draft of version 1 was completed in May 2003, the high profile version came out 2 years later. On Feb. 2008 I bought my first (popcorn hour) device, which supports H264. Hopefully this time it won't take so long
__________________
greets, kurt.
Pioneer PDP-427 XA | Popcorn Hour NMT C-200 | Sony STR-DB 840 QS | Canton Ergo 91 DC
kurt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 18:09   #15  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghitulescu View Post
The correct version is what MPEG says.
Not quite true, but HEVC and h.265 are both correct. Different consortiums working together, different name for the same thing like I said earlier. Like with AVC and h.264, and people calling it h.264, the ITU-T designation h.265 is probably the name that will be more common.
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 18:12   #16  |  Link
mp3dom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Italy
Posts: 1,066
BTW, if someone is interested I've just received a newsletter from Rovi/MainConcept/Whatever, that at IBC they will shows HEVC demos and probably some more infos.
mp3dom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2012, 21:33   #17  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by burfadel View Post
Not quite true, but HEVC and h.265 are both correct. Different consortiums working together, different name for the same thing like I said earlier. Like with AVC and h.264, and people calling it h.264, the ITU-T designation h.265 is probably the name that will be more common.
That's your opinion. We'll know for sure only when ITU will register H.265. Until then only speculations. Like with MPEG-3 some 10 years ago.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2012, 17:50   #18  |  Link
hajj_3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 958
I suspect HEVC will be implemented far quicker than h.264 was because web streaming and paid movies/tv shows is a huge business now so there are massive cost savings for this. Also Mobile would be greatly improved with half the bandwidth being needed for video and would harm your data allowance a lot less.

I'd expect some hardware decoding to be on all desktop/laptop/netbook/tablet/phones within 2yrs of the standard being finalized. As for good quality software encoders probably 3yrs till some decent ones start to crop up.

I'm more interested in Daala - the free open source video codec that xiph/mozilla are creating which will be slightly better than HEVC yet will be patent-free.
hajj_3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2012, 18:38   #19  |  Link
poisondeathray
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by hajj_3 View Post

I'm more interested in Daala - the free open source video codec that xiph/mozilla are creating which will be slightly better than HEVC yet will be patent-free.

Thanks I never heard of "Daala"
http://wiki.xiph.org/Daala

But where did you get this "slightly better" from ? Some tests or opinion or "someone said" ....
poisondeathray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2012, 19:03   #20  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,425
if opus can be slightly better than aac so i see no reason that people who are behind x264 could not create free alternative to h.265. with proper finacial support from google they may create something alot better than crappy vp8 codec.

Last edited by Atak_Snajpera; 17th August 2012 at 19:07.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
h.265, hevc

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 00:34.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.