CoreCodec/H.264 Codec "CoreAVC"

[nfm]

It's not a WMP10 issue, it doesn't lock up in ffdshow.

[comdw]

Also, it may not be everyone's favourite, but alot of people use MCE for playing back their files. The problem is arguably worse in MCE than WMP as the only way to kill it is to bring up the task manager which is not usually possible if you are using a remote control!

Anyway hope there will be a fix for this soon...

[Randi]

Actually I got the same result in ZoomPlayer, so it should be the decoders fault :-)

[Dark Eiri]

BSPlayer is fine.
Try it =P

[Randi]

with VMR9?

[Dark Eiri]

VMR9 Renderless, if your video-card supports it.
VMR7 Renderless is fine, too.

And also remember, the 2.0 free BSplayer come with WhenUsave, that, actually is VERY ANNOYING. Try to get the 1.32 free version.

[JohnnyFu]

I got a h.264 .ts movie wich gives me green pixel trash.

Klick Me (http://under.urban-souls.net/pics/coreavc_1.JPG)

I had this one time before with the BBC Planet Earth movie, then a new windows intall fixed it.
On my current windows install the problem is present again.

What causes this ?
I do not have this green pixel trash using PowerDVD7 !

I would like to give you more information about the video source (bourne supremacy) but all what i know it is 1920x1080, is there a tool like GSpot to read h.264 .ts informations ?

My rig:
AMD 64@ 2700Mhz - 245Mhz-RAM / 7600GT Forceware 91.33
WinXP SP2 -* CoreAVC 1.1 Pro

[wiak]

site down?
or atleast slow :scared:

[BetaBoy]

FYI all.... We have begun testing a new version that has several fixes as well as a new Haali splitter.... dont expect a release soon though as we are HEAVY in CorePlayer development atm. But I will keep everyone up to date on whats going on.

Current CoreAVC users will get an email later this coming week to login to our Core Account Services. Once logged in... they will be able to see the products thay have purchased and all its related information as well as if there are any updates available for them to download.

This will make the update process 'self-serve' for everyone.

[W3ird_N3rd]

Yes, our CoreAVC decoder will be available on OS X and Linux... and before ppl ask... Our CoreAVC encoder will be as well.
This was 16th June, is there any status update about this one and a half month later?

[BetaBoy]

No.... when it is close to being ready I will post info on it... till then we ARE working as fast as we can.

[W3ird_N3rd]

Okay, I'll be waiting.. Don't hurry it too much (we don't want it getting unstable) :).

[Gnerma]

BetaBoy will we see GPU acceleration in 2006 and/or v1.x?

[stefang]

Here are the 3 CoreAVC 'Decoder' Editions...

[[ Standard Edition ]]
- Baseline, Main, High profile support
- No, Interlaced
- No, SMP
- No, GPU


And how should that work? Support for interlaced is mandatory in Main and High Profile. Therefore that decoder does NOT support Main and High Profile.

Regards
Stefan Gehrer

[ChronoCross]

And how should that work? Support for interlaced is mandatory in Main and High Profile. Therefore that decoder does NOT support Main and High Profile.

Regards
Stefan Gehrer

If you go by that theory then x264 doesn't support high profile encoding.

Interlaced is simply one subset of High profile options. There are many other more important ones that the standard edition does support. Since most people don't encode using interlaced mode in High profile (as it's not even available yet in most encoders) High profile is limited to everything except interlaced decoding.

[Manao]

ChronoCross : actually, no, an encoder doesn't have to implement fully a profile to say it produces a stream from that profile. A decoder, however, must. Else profiles are useless.

[ChronoCross]

as long as they say "no interlaced" then that simply means a small limitation. Doesn't mean it doesn't cover High Profile. It's simply High profile with a limitation. You can still watch streams that are high profile without interlaced. Not like they are hiding it

[stefang]

It's simply High profile with a limitation.

High profile with limitations is not High profile anymore. You can call it whatever you want, like ChronoCross profile, but the name High Profile is reserved for something that supports the full set. I can understand if facts are bent for marketing purpose, in a range which is difficult to prove as wrong, but statements which are so clearly false should be avoided.
How to test this statement is wrong? Take a clip adhering to Main or High Profile which happens to be interlaced. The decoder does not play it, therefore the decoder does not support that profile.

Regards
Stefan Gehrer

[Manao]

I wouldn't go that far. There's no marketing purposes, and no intent to fool people behind CoreAVC versions description. It's indeed the easiest way to describe what the version does. And it's precise for main & high profile.

I was bitching with ChronoCross mostly for arguing's sake, to outline the distinction between encoders and decoders.

[GodofaGap]

Of course saying the standard version of CoreAVC supports


I, P and B slices
Multiple reference frames
In-Loop Deblocking Filter
CAVLC and CABAC
8x8dct
CQM's

is a lot better than saying main/high profile minus interlaced.

[stefang]

@Manao
No marketing purpose? I read here http://coreavc.corecodec.org/download.html that this decoder costs $9.95. What else would be the purpose of bending the truth about features?

@GodofaGap
Nowhere did I read Main/High Profile minus interlaced. Both the post and the website say the profiles are supported AND interlaced is not supported, which is contradictory. Now imagine John Doe buying a nice new camera that records in 1080i AVC. The manual says he needs a Main Profile decoder in order to watch his recordings on the PC. Google leads him to CoreAVC which claims to support Main Profile. Having never heard of the word interlaced before, he happily spends the ten bucks on the decoder, only to find out it does not work for him. Who's to blame here?

[ChronoCross]

Something can be high profile without being interlaced.

As for your reference to the decoder and the whole google thing. Perhaps he should read the capabilities before making a purchase. The CoreAVC page clearly states that the standard version supports all of main profile without interlacing.

At least that's what adults do.

[stefang]

Something can be high profile without being interlaced.
A clip can be High Profile without being interlaced. An encoder can
produce High Profile clips without having capabilities for interlaced.
But a decoder that does not support interlaced does NOT support High Profile. In fact video standards specify only decoders.

Perhaps he should read the capabilities before making a purchase.
That's what he did.

At least that's what adults do.
Not selling something which you don't deliver, that's what reasonable people do. Independent of their age.

[ChronoCross]

I will politely leave this conversation as it has no relavence to me. Although I do believe that what CoreAVC is doing is justified and VERY clear before making a purchase I realize it will not please all people.

Thank you for your time and I apologize for any feelings of harshness this may have cause.

[Hellworm]

I think "high profile support but without interlaced" is absolutely correct. Support doesn't mean it an officiall, standart conforming, certified ... high profile decoder. It merely says that the decoder is supporting high profile but without interlaced.

It would be much more complicated ( also for the end user ) to say this is a main profile decoder, that can decode high profile encodes which only use the features of bframes, cabac ... wouldn't it?

[CruNcher]

Yeah but the problem here is the average guy doesn't even know what the term "Interlace" means so i get stefang his point it is indeed problematic and could couse frustration on the end consumer level and alot not so nice e-mails to the CoreCodec support. That wouldn't be bad @ all i think but takeing into account that they have alot of US customers and seeing how US citizens like to sue everyone where possible, it could get problematic i think.
The Example of that Camera is a very good one seeing all the new AVCHD cams being released. But im still hoping that CoreCodec finds another way of Cross Financing the AVC Licenses, hope dies at last :)

[foxyshadis]

They just need to identify somewhere that CoreAVC standard will not play the vast majority of captured DVB streams, due to interlacing - in other words, that standard is more the DVD backup/media center choice.

[BetaBoy]

Of course saying the standard version of CoreAVC supports


I, P and B slices
Multiple reference frames
In-Loop Deblocking Filter
CAVLC and CABAC
8x8dct
CQM's

is a lot better than saying main/high profile minus interlaced.

thx... I will upload the 'advanced' description of the decoders Editions where I will break down the features like this so there is no confusion.

[BetaBoy]

They just need to identify somewhere that CoreAVC standard will not play the vast majority of captured DVB streams, due to interlacing - in other words, that standard is more the DVD backup/media center choice.
Standard is more like what Apple provides for AVC content (ipod, mobile, etc.). I will add a 'n00b' explaination of what each Edition does.... thx.

[JohnnyFu]

Hi,

BetaBoy do not forget my e-mail please :)

[Alizar]

I just wanted to post to say how pleased I was with the 1.0 -> 1.1 jump with CoreAVC, having been a tad unimpressed by the launch release. The 1.1 version has been very robust for me and quite CPU friendly.

And...

To provide a bit of context to a small issue which I added to the coreavc bug reporting tool: Apparently CoreAVC does not play well with MKV's variable frame rate implementation. In a file I've encoded that's primarily 23.976 animation, there's a small section of 29.97 that I configured to playback at the proper fps using a timecodes file. Unfortunately, in CoreAVC playback, the 29.97 section is perceptibly jerky whereas using ffdshow this issue does not appear.

[Shakey_Jake33]

This has likely been answered earlier in the topic, but it's become a bit of a jungle now.

Had a problem with CoreAVC 1.1.0.5 where my H.264 files (in mkv container w/ AAC sound, dunno if that matters) would freeze up on my secondary monitor.
Gone back to 1.0 as they work fine on 1.0.

If this a known issue, and has it been fixed in more recent (presumably private) builds?

[Xleon]

I'm glad I was pointed in this thread's direction. It has been informative (and lengthy!).

I've not had a response from emails or posts on the CoreAVC forum, so I thought I'd ask here. I bought V1.0 and was awaiting a V1.1 update link which has yet to arrive. (I've been keeping a constant check on my SPAM folder and it's not arrived there either).

How do I go about getting the V1.1 upgrade?

More worryingly, is it true that it's hardware locked? I only use it on one machine, but I still do not want online activation of any product I own. If the support is this slow, what happens when one day the activation server goes offline and doesn't come back for days? Would I have to wait days to install a product I legally bought and owned?

I would have to had thought about the purchase at all if the activation was enabled in V1.0. It may even have put me off.

It's a real shame as the legal purchasers will be the ones penalised while the pirates will be free to enjoy a hassle-free cracked copy. Having to go through the whole procedure whenever I update some hardware.

Look what happened to StarForce. Now a universally hated company. I don't want a bad reputation to taint what is otherwise an incredible product, as the CoreAVC codec is phenomenol.

[Selur]

"More worryingly, is it true that it's hardware locked? "
No

"How do I go about getting the V1.1 upgrade?"
Good question buddy of mine got the same problem.

[BetaBoy]

I have just sent out 5 upgrades to some ppl that requested. You can send me an email betaboy@corecodec.com and i'll take care of it for you. Once the Core Account it live it will be 'self serve'. You can see purchases and downloads available. For the most part the account system is done but we are waiting to release CoreAVC 1.2 which is planned shortly.

On the hardware lock... we are adding server authentication for CoreAVC 1.2 (also planned for 1.2 is DXVA / GPU support). If there is no net connection on the target device we will offer a path to upgrade it in an offline manner, but it still links directly to your Core Account.

[JohnnyFu]

oO...

You said you will send me a test version that possible fix my green pixel issue.

I mailed you days ago, as requested. I didnt received anything until today.

Now going to email you once again....

[xyloy]

A clip can be High Profile without being interlaced. An encoder can
produce High Profile clips without having capabilities for interlaced.
But a decoder that does not support interlaced does NOT support High Profile.
I agree with that. A decoder wich claims to support a Profile must support it entirely. Otherwise, it's not compliant with the specs.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Personally speaking, I think it would be far simpler for all concerned if there was just one "all singing and dancing" version of CoreAVC....

Or would such a marketing shift at this stage be too ridiculous to consider?

[Xleon]

Thanks betaboy - will do that in a couple of hours.

SeeMore, maybe they could at the very least have just "Consumer" and "Professional/Broadcast" versions? I'm not sure why the base version exists as almost all people will want GPU acceleration and to decode a large number of H264 files, you need multi-CPU support anyway.

[BetaBoy]

Personally speaking, I think it would be far simpler for all concerned if there was just one "all singing and dancing" version of CoreAVC....

Or would such a marketing shift at this stage be too ridiculous to consider?

We are considering omiting CoreAVC Standard when CoreAVC Enterprise comes out. But the market atm still has a demand for Standard Edition. It seems many of the users do not need more of the advanced features that Professional offers.

However, I think you will see a core shift when we release the CoreAVC Encoder and how we market it with the decoder.

[frodeste]

We are considering omiting CoreAVC Standard when CoreAVC Enterprise comes out. But the market atm still has a demand for Standard Edition. It seems many of the users do not need more of the advanced features that Professional offers.

However, I think you will see a core shift when we release the CoreAVC Encoder and how we market it with the decoder.

Is your website down? I am trying to look at the site, but it will not load.

[JohnnyFu]

try corecodec.com, coreavc.com seems to be down very often.

[BetaBoy]

Our host is having a service related issue atm... check back in a little bit. Thx.

[chros]

Does the current version (1.1) support (gain advantages of) multi-core cpu-s (multithreaded ?) ?

[SeeMoreDigital]

Does this help: -

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/4356/coreavc11spec20060701lk3.png

[chros]

So it does !
thanks SeeMoreDigital !

[Sirber]

Anyone got COreAVC working under mplayer (win32) ?

[Sharktooth]

AFAIK XBMC team is working on it.

[eLupus]

actually we are not working on it right now. currently waiting to see what corecodec decides to do with unix support and such. the windows dlls have abit too much gui deps.

[Gnerma]

... also planned for 1.2 is DXVA / GPU support ...Oh awesome I just noticed this :cool:

So how is 1.2 coming along? We haven't heard from you in a while BetaBoy.