CoreCodec/H.264 Codec "CoreAVC" [Archive] - Page 129

BetaBoy

18th July 2011, 23:33

BetaBoy,
can you tell us a little more about your plans.
Will CoreMVC be a separate product which we'll have to buy separately or it will be part of the new CoreAVC 3.x? If it's the first will there be any discount if we buy one more license for CoreAVC now or it'll be better to wait?
I'm willing to support your work and buy a new license but I'm kind of reluctant to buy CoreAVC only for the added 10-bit support. I've hoped for something more ... may be fix the deinterlace issue ;)

We will have 3 AVC based products: CoreAVC, CoreMVC and CoreSVC. MVC and SVC are based on our work with CoreAVC 3.0 and each are separate products.

We will offer a discount for CoreMVC when its released for current CoreAVC customers. We expect it to be release soon after we CoreAVC 3.0 next month.

CoreSVC will likely be later this fall.

On the deinterlaced issue.... me too.

BetaBoy

18th July 2011, 23:55

I also wanted to follow up on the 'just 10 bit'. While I hear what your saying its far from 'it' as I've already indicated 3.0 now allows us a much smoother path to true 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 of which we are hopeful to complete 4:4:4 soon after 3.0 is released.

pankov

19th July 2011, 00:18

BetaBoy,
don't get me wrong - I respect your work but I'll believe it when I see it.
As a fellow developer I know it's not easy to keep up with the deadlines but your release / QA schedule is way off from your promises.
I hope you'll get my words not as an assault but as a constructive criticism.
;)

BetaBoy

19th July 2011, 00:20

Not at all... I/We appreciate all your feedback.

cyberbeing

19th July 2011, 05:14

Bottom line its a milestone release... 2.x got you 2.x updates, not 3.x.

Just to confirm, purchasers who bought CoreAVC 2.5.x this month during the mid-summer sale get a free upgrade to CoreAVC 3.0 as promised? And I assume they will get 3.x updates as well?

toomyzoom

19th July 2011, 06:10

I feel I was cheated. I purchased Coreavc 2.5.0 in 4/4/2011 for its "broken" DXVA support, and after over 3 months, the only update was version 2.5.5 with no significant change. My problems with green block and artifact still exist. MPC-HC's internal decoder does a better job than this piece of shit. My purchase date is over 60 days so the update is not in option. I don't think I will purchase anything from CoreCodec ever again.

ChronoCross

19th July 2011, 06:56

Just to confirm, purchasers who bought CoreAVC 2.5.x this month during the mid-summer sale get a free upgrade to CoreAVC 3.0 as promised? And I assume they will get 3.x updates as well?

Here is a copy of their poorly written and formatted newsletter.

Hello,

We are emailing you to clarify about the upcoming CoreAVC v3.0

release and our upgrade policy for 2.x customers.

AVC is a patented format, and we pay royalties for the use of these
patents.

Each new decoder comes at a cost to us, including upgrade copies.
Furthermore,

CoreAVC v3.0 is a major milestone for us here at CoreCodec; our
engineering staff

has been working on it for well over 2 years. We have reworked the
v3.0 'core' to

support many new h.264 features and profiles.

As such, we are unable to offer free upgrades to all existing users.
When CoreAVC

3.0 launches (around the end of next month), all customers who have
purchased

within the last 60 days will receive a free upgrade. This includes
customers who

purchase during our current promotion. In preparation for the 3.0
launch, we have
reduced the price by $5.00 (to $7.95) - it will be going up at launch.
This is the
cheapest way to get CoreAVC 3.0.

This offer is a 'time limited' (10 day) discount code for $5.00 off
our $12.95 purchase price = $7.95 with discount.

Get it here: https://customers.corecodec.com/cart.php?a=add&pid=10

Use Discount code: SUMMER2011

Once this coupon expires in 10 days, the price will return to $12.95.

Thank you for your continued support.

Regards,

I feel I was cheated. I purchased Coreavc 2.5.0 in 4/4/2011 for its "broken" DXVA support, and after over 3 months, the only update was version 2.5.5 with no significant change. My problems with green block and artifact still exist. MPC-HC's internal decoder does a better job than this piece of shit. My purchase date is over 60 days so the update is not in option. I don't think I will purchase anything from CoreCodec ever again.

Welcome to the club.

cyberbeing

19th July 2011, 10:06

When CoreAVC 3.0 launches (around the end of next month), all customers who have purchased within the last 60 days will receive a free upgrade. This includes customers who purchase during our current promotion.

Thanks ChronoCross, that answers my question.

deets

19th July 2011, 12:26

hmm not happy at all...

BetaBoy

19th July 2011, 12:39

Chrono.... Pls step from this thread as you have nothing to contribute except for 'drama'.

Tommy... Pm me your account info and I'll look into the purchase.

The Seeker

19th July 2011, 12:43

I must admit, I'm a little miffed as when I purchase a lifetime license, I expect it to be oh, I don't know, lifetime?

BetaBoy

19th July 2011, 13:39

Lifetime has never been implied nor has it been for our previous 1.x and 2.x milestones as each had upgrade costs. We added related questions to the KB to assit those people who need clarity.

Disabled

19th July 2011, 13:56

Did they advertise "lifetime license" somewhere?
Every software you buy has a lifetime usage license. (Unless you buy a limited usage license) Thus advertising a "lifetime license" might imply a lifetime update guarantee, like for instance slysoft and many other companies understand it.
But in the end, you didn't get screwed like the 1.x buyers did. You bought a high profile decoder, you got a high profile decoder.

BetaBoy

19th July 2011, 16:09

Not to poke at Slysoft and that 'guarantee', but are they even licensed to sell AVC? http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensees.aspx

Same for Via and Dolby, I see no Skysoft licensee.... and that's my point.... Its easy to make such guarantees when you are not paying (allegedly) for any royalties that come with restrictions on licensing.

Disabled

19th July 2011, 16:16

Not to poke at Slysoft and that 'guarantee', but are they even licensed to sell AVC?
Do they even sell an AVC decoder? (Your point is probably valid for AACS/BD+ though)
Its easy to make such guarantees when you are not paying (allegedly) for any royalties that come with restrictions on licensing.
If its so easy then make a "10 bucks + 0.50 per redownload for lifetime" guarantee. I wouldn't have bitched a bit about 1.x not being a high profile decoder with that model.

CiNcH

19th July 2011, 18:29

You should first debug the old stuff before you go to a new major version.

You are able to multitask? You can't even get one job done properly.

Sorry guys, but this is really bad business. I am done here. This time I mean it.

toomyzoom

19th July 2011, 18:32

Tommy... Pm me your account info and I'll look into the purchase.

Lol, tried to send a PM, got this "BetaBoy has exceeded their stored private messages quota and cannot accept further messages until they clear some space."

BetaBoy

19th July 2011, 23:59

Space made... Try again.

dead_screem

20th July 2011, 00:09

So will there be a 2.x->3.x upgrade path like 1.x->2.x had? IIRC Click 1.x license then click upgrade button then pay 5.95 to upgrade it into 2.x. So will there be a way to do that for 2.x to 3.x or are we stuck paying either full price or settling with re-buying 2.5 with time limited 7.95 code and getting 3.x free?

BetaBoy

20th July 2011, 00:13

Audionut

20th July 2011, 01:17

Disabled... It's amazing how your postings of 'no value' still continues in this and other D9 threads (re:http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1432058&postcount=95 ) with no moderator consequence.... We welcome and greatly appreciate constructive feedback both good and bad. But your posts continue to attack and add nothing but drama to an otherwise valuable forum.

Get off your high horse. You were happy to join in on the conversation when it suited you, and then just as happy to berate another member when they continued the discussion in a manner you didn't approve of.

This isn't the first time you've happily had off topic conversations, and then 'disapproved' when that conversation has led down a path you do not approve of.

The release of core 3 with core 2 in it's current form is a joke.

"Purchase a lifetime upgrade".

"Oh wait, we've decided we need more money, deal with our buggy decoder, or give us some more money."

And no Betaboy, I am not going to keep this thread on topic as you see it. See the thing is, you are not a moderator here.
If you have a problem with posts on this forum, instead of prancing around on your high horse, you should follow the rules you preach and not continue the conversation in public domain, but report the post and leave it alone.

BetaBoy

20th July 2011, 02:33

Audionut

20th July 2011, 03:03

It's not a matter of 'approval'... Liked or disliked comments are all welcome. But when a contributor such as 'disabled' does nothing but post unmoderated FUD over and over and over again, it gets kind of old... and only helps proliferate alternative forums like Doom10.

Meh.

When a software company charges money for software, and posts claims of grandeur, and promises of fixes over, and over, and over and over, and over, and promises of releases (sometime this century), over, and over, and over, and over, it gets kind of old... and only helps proliferate the user base to other alternatives.

It also doesn't help when the 'software founder' contributes to this forum with ideals of, 'we can do wonders and eat cucumbers', "We are really good at multi-tasking", when clearly this is not the case, and then has the hide to call out those customers who have paid money to support your software, given that there are other means of obtaining your software rather then payment, and, there are other free open source alternatives.

This on top of the fact, that these customers also paid for life-time upgrades, only for the 'software founder', to then require those same customers to re-purchase the software. In the vain hope that somehow in amongst the 9 million promises you have provided to this community of the bug fixes, the software will become functional and usable.

Coreplayer mobile for Symbian 5th edition was promised in the summer of 2009. 2 years ago. You can sit there and type up all the excuses you want as to why it hasn't been released (though generally if your history is any indication, you will simply tell me that this is off topic).
If you cant see, and don't understand how and why this upsets your paying customers, then obviously you should remove yourself from a customer service roll.

With regards to your constant disapproval of the so called lack of moderator action.
If you feel that strongly about it, you should raise the issue with Doom9. If you have, then clearly you have no respect for Doom9 and this community as you continue to berate the lack of 'moderator action' in the public domain. If you haven't, then again, it just goes to show that you are to busy prancing around on your high horse, berating other users of this community when clearly you cannot follow the guidelines and rules of this community yourself.

ChronoCross

20th July 2011, 03:42

Chrono.... Pls step from this thread as you have nothing to contribute except for 'drama'.

I provided your customer with the information he/she requested and then welcomed another one of your disappointed members to the club, both comments being on topic.

I do apologize that you can't just ban people like you do on your forum when they say things you don't like. It must be tough to actually have people who are willing to call you out on things that they have experienced with you, your company, and your product.

It is amazing that you have the gall to tell your customers, who paid you money for a product to stop participating in discussion of the product. Just because you don't like what someone has to say doesn't mean you shouldn't spend time fixing the issues that are brought up.

BetaBoy

20th July 2011, 04:38

Audionut.... Chrono... Thank you both for proving my points.

We check every report posted here with each release and have found it to always be an amazing resource and since I joined Doom9 back in 2001 when I was working for DivX. I have had nothing but respect for Doom9 and his community since then, and nothing will change that.

ChronoCross

20th July 2011, 05:06

Your obliviousness is astounding.

CiNcH

20th July 2011, 08:22

The release of core 3 with core 2 in it's current form is a joke.
"Oh wait, we've decided we need more money, deal with our buggy decoder, or give us some more money."
This is very true. I don't even think that this is a matter of opinion anymore. BetaBoy, you should take this as constructive criticism. What you do is a complete no-go.

I bought CoreAVC 2.0 and never used it since. No on-the-fly format changes in DXVA, still no proper hardware deinterlacing with MS standard renderers (you got plenty of samples already, and it is not random), no DXVA with DVBViewer/DVBSource at all. And now you are going to 3.0? Well...

madshi

20th July 2011, 08:32

IMHO, adding 10bit and eventually 4:4:4 support warrants a new "major" release and an upgrade price. We shouldn't expect new features to come for free. That's not how commercial software works.

That said, I would expect nothing less from Core than to release another 2.* bugfix release to fix all showstopper bugs which affect the advertized 2.* functionality. Or alternatively, if Core is not able to make the advertized features work properly in version 2.*, the upgrade to version 3 should be free for all customers affected by the 2.* bugs.

Just my 2 cents.

Disabled

20th July 2011, 09:36

Very true madshi. 10bit, 444 and MVC are features not in h264 high profile, so if you want them, buy a new decoder. Bugfixes and advertised functionality should be fixed in 2.x or at Cores choice give them a 3.x license.

CiNcH

20th July 2011, 10:32

I totally agree! Now this is constructive, isn't it?

pankov

20th July 2011, 11:18

I have two CoreAVC licenses - just to support the team, but I do agree with madshi that asking money for bugfixes is not nice.
I'm not saying it's expensive but it's a principal matter.

Guest

20th July 2011, 15:12

Your obliviousness is astounding. No ad hominems per rule 4, please. Thank you.

BetaBoy

21st July 2011, 16:52

I have two CoreAVC licenses - just to support the team, but I do agree with madshi that asking money for bugfixes is not nice.
I'm not saying it's expensive but it's a principal matter.

Thank you all again for your feedback. We have listened to your concerns and will release an updated 2.x version for those not opting to migrate to 3.0. We are working on the details now but it will likely have to come after 3.0 is out as we will have to back port many of the 3.0 changes to it to address some of the reports.

madshi

21st July 2011, 17:32

That sounds very good to me. Personally, I'll likely upgrade to 3.0, anyway. But I think releasing a 2.x bugfix version will go a long way to improve customer satisfaction. And as weird as it sounds: Releasing a 2.x bugfix version might motivate some people to actually upgrade to 3.0, which they might not do otherwise.

Maybe we should make a list of the showstopper bugs? From what I've read in this thread there seem to be at least 2:

(1) Hardware deinterlacing seems to sometimes have the fields swapped. From what I've read some of the open source decoders don't seem to have this problem, so it should be fixable.
(2) There seem to be some problems with DXVA.

Probably (2) consists of more than one problem. Anybody willing to fill in the gaps? But please don't go overboard. We should ask for bugfixes for showstopper bugs, only.

nussman

21st July 2011, 19:24

2.1 - on the fly format changes (i.e. 720p => 1080i) with DXVA
2.2 - no DXVA with dvbviewer sourcefilter

molitar

22nd July 2011, 07:39

What gets me is that the upgrade offer is only for a short time.. Why would I pay out $7.95 without knowing if the problems are resolved.. Now we should still have the upgrade offer after it's released and we trial it and find it working. I been using mpc-hc and ffdshow internal since 2.5 because all 2.5 have had some major bugs with them. Crashing while switching from one monitor to another, green artifacts, ect. I don't mind paying the $7.95 upgrade AFTER I know it is working but not before.

mkanet

22nd July 2011, 13:46

Sorry to go off subject. I have a very basic questiion. Does coreavc 2.5.5 and/or 3.0 have equivalent or better picture quality than the hardware accelerated nvidia setting (I use nvidia 8800) when using pure software decoding? I have an issue with FF/REW (no video for several seconds when I press REW/FF) if I use hardware acceleration. I doubt the issue I have with hardware acceleration mode is related to coreavc. I just want to make sure software mode is just as good as hardware (other than requiring more CPU usage). If someone know why I have the FF/REW problem, resolving that issue would be nice too.

Thanks,
MKANET

nevcairiel

22nd July 2011, 13:55

The output of all H264 decoders is the same, as long as the decoders are not flawed. There is no quality difference between hardware or software decoders.

LigH

22nd July 2011, 14:55

Modern video formats often have rather long "decoding units" (GOPs / GOVs), and their beginning is the only place where decoding may start without the risk of corrupt video output.

The ability to seek to either exactly the wanted timestamp (and decode quickly from the previous keyframe) or to the nearest decoding start keyframe is a matter of both the container splitter filter and the video decoder. And a more or less fluid FF / REW behaviour is only possible for video with rather limited complexity = rather low compression efficiency (like Blu-ray compatible video). Not all AVC videos are Blu-ray compatible. Not all AVC videos are suitable for such features. The longer the GOVs and the more multiple references, the less probable such features will work.

mkanet

22nd July 2011, 16:21

Thanks. Having said that, how does that apply to remuxed bluray m2ts (AVC)->mkv container? What could have changed on this machine for FF/REW to cause no video for several seconds (I can still hear audio during this time). Right before the video is displayed again, I can see a few frames trickling in before video returns to normal. This problem seems to have started when I started messing with LAV splitter. I had set the below registry settings. Not sure if that has anything to do with the problem or how I would reset the problematic registry info.

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Media Type\Extensions\.m2ts]
"Source Filter"="{B98D13E7-55DB-4385-A33D-09FD1BA26338}"

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Media Type\Extensions\.ts]
"Source Filter"="{B98D13E7-55DB-4385-A33D-09FD1BA26338}"

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Media Type\Extensions\.mkv]
"Source Filter"="{B98D13E7-55DB-4385-A33D-09FD1BA26338}"

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Media Type\Extensions\.mpls]
"Source Filter"="{B98D13E7-55DB-4385-A33D-09FD1BA26338}"

Now, if I try installing Haali or LAV they both have this issue. If I switch to software decoding in my AVC decoder, the problem immediately goes away.

I would greatly appreciate any tips that would help fix this problem without having to reimage my machine.

Thanks again,
MKANET

Modern video formats often have rather long "decoding units" (GOPs / GOVs), and their beginning is the only place where decoding may start without the risk of corrupt video output.

The ability to seek to either exactly the wanted timestamp (and decode quickly from the previous keyframe) or to the nearest decoding start keyframe is a matter of both the container splitter filter and the video decoder. And a more or less fluid FF / REW behaviour is only possible for video with rather limited complexity = rather low compression efficiency (like Blu-ray compatible video). Not all AVC videos are Blu-ray compatible. Not all AVC videos are suitable for such features. The longer the GOVs and the more multiple references, the less probable such features will work.

mkanet

22nd July 2011, 16:23

If that's true, then why are people so excited about CoreAVC 3.0 with 10bit decoding? Doesn't this affect picture quality? Is this feature software only decoding?

The output of all H264 decoders is the same, as long as the decoders are not flawed. There is no quality difference between hardware or software decoders.

Underground78

22nd July 2011, 17:11

If that's true, then why are people so excited about CoreAVC 3.0 with 10bit decoding? Doesn't this affect picture quality?

It's 10bit encoding that improves the quality. Of course you will need 10bit decoding to use it but two decoders that support this feature will/must have exactly the same output.

LoRd_MuldeR

22nd July 2011, 19:12

...but two decoders that support this feature will/must have exactly the same output.

Only if they output at 10-Bit.

Generally you won't have a full 10-Bit chain, including 10-Bit renderer and 10-Bit display. Instead dithering (or clipping) will happen at some point.

Even if the decoder outputs dithered 8-Bit from a 10-Bit source, 10-Bit encoding still has a lot of advantages (less "internal" rounding errors in the encoder/decoder).

But then the output may not be identical anymore, depending on what dithering algorithm is used by the individual decoder...

edison

22nd July 2011, 19:26

I think the CRT display can do true 10-bit display.

mkanet

22nd July 2011, 21:04

Thanks for explaining guys. I dont have any 10bit ended sources. The only H.264 video I watch is bluray.

If anyone happens to have any ideas what might cause the FF/REW "blank out" issue (only tested with bluray remuxed to mkv), please let me know. It's weird, as soon as I set acceleration to "none" I dont get that issue anymore. I can't use DXVA at all since I see the "green distortion artifact" issue with coreavc.

BetaBoy

22nd July 2011, 21:12

Today we increased 9/10-bit decoding by 15% with the latest assembly changes for 3.0 ;-) We still have some time left before we call it final, so we are looking to finish some IDCT work. Also... I was asked by PM..... yes, we will support more 'Output' options for 10bit.

nussman

23rd July 2011, 01:22

Please concentrate on the showstoppers!
10bit decoding is interesting but until now its a academic probelm.

mkanet

23rd July 2011, 04:51

BetaBoy (or anyone):

Will CoreAVC 3.0 fix the problem with DXVA where video is distorted with green penalized artifacts. There have been screenshots posted here in the past with this issue. I dont have this problem when using MPC homecinema video filter using DXVA for AVC bluray material on the same machine.

Today we increased 9/10-bit decoding by 15% with the latest assembly changes for 3.0 ;-) We still have some time left before we call it final, so we are looking to finish some IDCT work. Also... I was asked by PM..... yes, we will support more 'Output' options for 10bit.