Wide Compatibility

[PuzZLeR]

Since I've been encoding with H.264 I've noticed alot of compatibility issues. This is really becoming a bit of a headache (as if the long encode times and CURRENT lack of stand-alone support isn't enough).

But I do really enjoy the quality, so I keep coping...

But why can't we have just one profile-fits-all? Main Profile? High Profile? What's the difference anyway?

For example, I just found out recently that my video in the Main profile will not play on the iPod. So therefore, I had to make a second batch of encodes in the lower complexity Baseline profile.

Now I hear of Apple or QuickTime won't support this, or that. As well the latest Nero ShowTime refuses anything encoded from x264, although welcomes Nero Digital flawlessly. What's going to happen when/if the stand-alone DVD players do come out eventually?

Apple TV apparently needs certain flags, and specific resolution sizes as well.

Blu-ray and HD-DVD? AVCHD? Now we're talking different religions.

Also lately, I've been experimenting with multiple reference frames and the "High Quality - Insane" profile from Sharktooth. The quality is fabulous, and the slow encodes are worth it for the special clips, but now I hear that it affects compatibility of the standard, such as akupenguin, an x264 developer, mentions here:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=118158

Is this all happening because the technology is still relatively new? What can I expect in the future and what are some people's feelings about this?

My main interest is long-term compatibility of my video and I'm wondering how other people are handling it. I don't want to have to keep re-encoding until my video melts or my CPUs keep burn out.

Thanks for reading.

[Manao]

It doesn't affect compatibility with the standard, but with some decoders which doesn't support the standard and usurp the name h264 decoder. For Nero, it's most probably a bug of some sort. For Quicktime, it's a wanted design from Apple's engineers. For Sony, it's a long standing firm policy not to do as you should but as you want, if it allows you to **** your users...

[PuzZLeR]

Hey Manao,

Yup, I agree with you on the Sony thing. Their constant proprietary-ware is always disturbing the equilibrium of the ecosystem.

Hopefully the Nero thing is only a bug and hopefully Apple decides to loosen up on their pickiness sometime soon.

I guess I'm just spoiled with MPEG-2. It's got great encoding/decoding speed and capability, fabulous quality with enough bitrate and incredible compatibility virtually everywhere. You can't go wrong.

But like I said, with "enough bitrate". It's just so unfortunate that MPEG-2 needs much higher bitrates/file sizes to get watchable quality otherwise I would never want to encode it to anything else.

I still would love to know if anybody has found some good encoding recipe for AVC that has a good compatibility spread among many platforms.

[PuzZLeR]

The new Apple TV has started to ship out just now. Did they suddenly change the specs on us?

I'm already encoding in Main profile with CABAC for my "quality" encodes.

I've already started encoding a second batch in Baseline profile with CAVLC for my iPod encodes.

Now Apple TV only accepts Main "Progressive" with CAVLC.

Does it get any worse?

(Maybe it will accept my iPod encodes as per the latest wording of "up to" before the bitrate. I don't know, but this whole thing is sure giving me a headache.)

[giandrea]

The new Apple TV has started to ship out just now. Did they suddenly change the specs on us?

I'm already encoding in Main profile with CABAC for my "quality" encodes.

I've already started encoding a second batch in Baseline profile with CAVLC for my iPod encodes.

Now Apple TV only accepts Main "Progressive" with CAVLC.

Does it get any worse?

(Maybe it will accept my iPod encodes as per the latest wording of "up to" before the bitrate. I don't know, but this whole thing is sure giving me a headache.)

It will play for sure your iPod Baseline encodes, and it will probably play your Main Profile with CABAC encodes, but you should really try to be sure.

[bond]

specific players have specific features and therefore specific limits. its that way with every format (including mpeg-2. ever tried playing HD mpeg-2 on a dvd player?).

[PuzZLeR]

giandrea:

That's reassuring that at least Apple TV will play one of my batches. If it can also play my "quality" batch as well, I'm smiling wider.

bond:
If I was looking for the widest AVC compatibility I guess I could count on Baseline. Everything seems to work with a backwards compatibility, much like you mentioned HD. Yes, HD may not work on SD, but SD will work on HD (I assume).

I guess, for now, I will continue encoding my "quality" batch, and continue on with a second "iPod batch" to acheive the widest compatibility. External hard drives are getting bigger and cheaper all the time, and we should all have a backup of our data nevertheless. I guess it may be better in this case to have two types of the same data instead of a copy (as I see it).

I hope we're not too far away from the day that when a player/device says "AVC" it means all AVC video (much like an MP3 player means virtually any MP3).

Hmmm. Now what's going to happen when BD/HD-DVD go primetime? I wonder what role my AVC vidz (supposedly "standard" on these machines) will have then...

[bond]

I hope we're not too far away from the day that when a player/device says "AVC" it means all AVC video (much like an MP3 player means virtually any MP3).

Hmmm. Now what's going to happen when BD/HD-DVD go primetime? I wonder what role my AVC vidz (supposedly "standard" on these machines) will have then...looking at what happened to asp i heavily doubt that we will see avc players that handle all avc streams in the next years

more likely is that we find out the avc specs for hddvd/bluray and encode all our videos with the same features (as we can be sure that the players handle those sorts of avc streams)

[PuzZLeR]

Hello bond, thanks for your response(s).

ASP is very different in many ways. It was never deemed a disc standard, and it too had its own wide variance in encoding/implementations/playback, etc. (at least it seems).

Allow me to ask, you or anybody else reading, is there any online info on the actual BD/HD-DVD specs in AVC? I have a feeling this topic is rather pre-mature as of this date since I found nothing anywhere about it.

I guess the ultimate objective is getting my video onto these next-gen discs, in AVC format, as losslessly as possible. (As video , not like data discs like was the case for ASP such as for DivX/Xvid playback).

It would be nice if we can get our exisiting AVC content compliant starting now, or at least within reach of a lossless mux job into an m(2)ts/evo container of BD/HD-DVD for authoring/burning/playing later.

Thanks in advance if anybody's got info on this.

[bond]

Allow me to ask, you or anybody else reading, is there any online info on the actual BD/HD-DVD specs in AVC? nope, the specs are not public

[delacroixp]

My main interest is long-term compatibility of my video and I'm wondering how other people are handling it.
I don't want to have to keep re-encoding until my video melts or my CPUs keep burn out.

I think that you can pretty much forget about that... digital movies are hardly enduring like the pyramids.
A few years down the line and Mpeg2 movies will be as un-decipherable as Indus script (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_script) and MP4 will fare hardly better.


looking at what happened to asp i heavily doubt that we will see avc players that handle all avc streams in the next years

more likely is that we find out the avc specs for hddvd/bluray and encode all our videos with the same features
(as we can be sure that the players handle those sorts of avc streams)
Considering weaver4's (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1070338#post1070338) comments on the difficulty and expense of implementing the complete AVC specs... getting
the right balance is likely to be a highwire act at best...



:):devil::D
Pascal