Sample HD MPEG-1 Clip...

[travisbell]

Hey guys, found this site just now. They are saying that with their MPEG-1 VBR (~5mbps) you can fit a 2 hour HD video on standard DVDs. Downloaded their test HD demo and it does look pretty good -- BUT, since I am no video guru I am wondering if someone can explain to me how this is different than MPEG-2/ASP/AVC.

Main site, http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/samples.php

Download HD demo, http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/samples/Least_Likely_PSA.mpg

Thanks!!

[E-Male]

interesting
my athlon 1700 can play that clip without (or very few) dropped frames
looks nice to me

[SeeMoreDigital]

Actually, there's nothing new at generating Mpeg1 encodes at high-def resolutions... I've been doing it more than five years for use at exhibition stands!

As with Mpeg2 and Mpeg4, Mpeg1 has really improved as a codec in recent years.... It's just a real shame the majority of people still associate it with VCD (and VCD bit-rates).

By the way, for some reason the "Least_Likely_PSA.mpeg" sample has been given aspect ratio signalling. After re-signalling to 1:1, the encode looks fine :)


Cheers

[E-Male]

can you recommend a windows mpeg1 encoder for HD? (incl vbr)

[Kika]

Just use TMPGEnc 2.5x, MPEG1 support will never expire...

[Shinobu]

this sample is very dark and in a 2.35 AR => hight compressibility.
it as also a lots a block in some aeras.

i've tested and used a lot mpeg1 and mpeg2, with hdtv here's MY visual impression:
hdtv mpeg2 > 10 mbps looks good.
hdtv mpeg1 > 15 mbps looks good also.
hdtv mpeg2 < 6 mbps looks like crap.
hdtv mpeg1 < 9 mbps looks like crap.

with a very good mpeg1 encoder with custom matrix, and 3 or more passes, i think it can do good looking HDTV quality around 9-10mbps, less than that is a dream.

ps: i have better result in encoding mpeg1 with quenc than with tmpgenc (and it's free).
ps2: if it's for hdtv archiving on DVD media, just use mpeg2, you will always have a better quality, and all graphics card (since around 1999-2000) have full mpeg2 hardware decoding

++

[Kika]

i have better result in encoding mpeg1 with quenc than with tmpgenc (and it's free).

Did you ever try CQ-Mode with P- and B-Spoilage setting of 0?
Works good with 1280x720 and 960x720

[digigami]

this sample is very dark and in a 2.35 AR => hight compressibility.
it as also a lots a block in some aeras.

i've tested and used a lot mpeg1 and mpeg2, with hdtv here's MY visual impression:
hdtv mpeg2 > 10 mbps looks good.
hdtv mpeg1 > 15 mbps looks good also.
hdtv mpeg2 < 6 mbps looks like crap.
hdtv mpeg1 < 9 mbps looks like crap.

with a very good mpeg1 encoder with custom matrix, and 3 or more passes, i think it can do good looking HDTV quality around 9-10mbps, less than that is a dream.

ps: i have better result in encoding mpeg1 with quenc than with tmpgenc (and it's free).
ps2: if it's for hdtv archiving on DVD media, just use mpeg2, you will always have a better quality, and all graphics card (since around 1999-2000) have full mpeg2 hardware decoding


I'm curious about the assertions you make in your post here, especially regarding the differences between MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 bitrates. MPEG-2 adds many new features over MPEG-1, but for 24p (ie. feature film) encoding, there are few. Instead, most of the new features in MPEG-2 are related to the coding of interlaced video. These features include, dct_type, alternate_scan, field_picture, field motion vectors (4-per macroblock) etc.

For standard 24p encoding, there are few gains to be had, at least, that is my experience as the developer of MegaPEG and MPressionist.

Also, you refer to block artifacts in our MPEG-1 HD sample. This sample is designed to illustrate the use of MPEG-1 as a HD streaming/delivery format, not as an archival format. I am curious to know what decoder you are using to evaluate the stream. The diagnostic tool I use primarily is MPressionist, and it includes both highly-accurate (reference) and fairly-accurate (commonly-implemented) IDCT algorithms. My guess is that if you are seeing visible artifacts then the IDCT implementation of your decoder software is not conforming to the MPEG standard. I've reviewed our HD stream in a number of players, including Apple's MPEG-2 decoder (MPEG-2 playback component), MPressionist, VideoLAN and Windows Media Player, and no artifacts are visible under normal viewing conditions, which is to say, the same conditions one would use when watching TV.

Could you describe the playback environment you are using? Thanks.

Gen Kiyooka
--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[easyfab]

for info

http://www.digigami.com/index.html

Mpeg2 better than h264 ?
What H264 encoder is used for the comparaison?

[bobololo]

For standard 24p encoding, there are few gains to be had, at least, that is my experience as the developer of MegaPEG and MPressionist.

Gen Kiyooka
Digigami

I've read with interest your press release claiming the very best performance of your VBR MPEG-2 HD encoder. Being myself involved in codecs development, I've to admit that I'm simply amazed by such assertions. With some exaggerations, it's like saying "tractors run faster than formula1 race cars" and you should be very brave to affirm this ;)

Hence, as you can guess I'm really wondering what kind of nitro you load into your tractors to make them so good ;) Obviously I'm not asking you to unveil your secrets but maybe you could at least enlight us with some technical clarifications with regard to your claims : encoding conditions (resolutions, bitrate, rate control constraints, etc.), which H.264 did you compare to and how it was set, how did you compare, and what makes you say which result is better than the other (objective metrics, subjective assessment ?), etc.

Thanks !

[CruNcher]

@easyfab and bobololo
looking here http://digigami.in-long-beach-ca.com/megapeg/HD-MPEG-1-VBR/commandN/
it seems he compares with *cough* apple quicktime h.264 :P (no comment)

[Sagittaire]

IMO digigami encoder isn't better than for libavcodec for MPEG2 ... lol

[JohnV]

@easyfab and bobololo
looking here http://digigami.in-long-beach-ca.com/megapeg/HD-MPEG-1-VBR/commandN/
it seems he compares with *cough* apple quicktime h.264 :P (no comment)
Well, looks like normal marketing to me.. ;) Of course they must know that their claims are not true if they use a good h.264 encoder for comparison.

[digigami]

Well, looks like normal marketing to me.. ;) Of course they must know that their claims are not true if they use a good h.264 encoder for comparison.

Hi -

Thanks for the responses. Currently, the primary marketing thrust of H.264 is that it can compress HD feature films down into the same bitrates as standard definition DVD. Our marketing is aimed at demonstrating that MPEG-2 VBR is a viable alternative to H.264 for this purpose. As I stated in my blog, I am willing to do comparative analysis. I am not interested in comparing 5s test clips of random camcorder footage, but rather professionally produced feature film/motion graphics/TV content.

It is not strictly marketing. Both our MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 VBR encoders are producing HD bitstreams with average bitrates well below 9mbs/s. If you look about 1 year ago we were promoting our MPEG-1 encoder as an alternative to Real/Flash for streaming video. You will also find a 1/2 D1 NTSC MPEG-2 sample for DVD on our web site at 0.5mbs/s. There's a consistent theme here - not an isolated incident.

In the last 24 hours I produced a 1280x720x50 fps version of the Mako Shark Club Jacket sample to HD-DVD specs, average bitrate 11 mbits/s and the quality is essentially perfect.

In order for MPEG-2 VBR to be a viable alternative to H.264, it does not have to be better, it merely needs to be comparable.

As far as the quality goes, the clips on our site speak for themselves.

Gen

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[digigami]

Well, looks like normal marketing to me.. ;) Of course they must know that their claims are not true if they use a good h.264 encoder for comparison.

If you look in the CommandN folder, you will find the H.264 QuickTime version. Go ahead and compress it using Nero. According to H.264 marketing you will be able to get it down to 1/2 the size of my MPEG-1/MPEG-2 file. So around 85MB. Complete the test and I will post the results and write about it in my blog.

My personal belief is that there are fundamental lower limits (called the entropy of a clip) which can be approached by any good encoder technology but reducing further one runs into the law of diminishing returns.

Also, if you have a sample you'd also like to compare with, I prefer to start with a high quality source.

Gen

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[digigami]

technical clarifications with regard to your claims : encoding conditions (resolutions, bitrate, rate control constraints, etc.)
Thanks !

Generally, the encoding target(s) are standard HD profiles used in DTV, HD-DVD etc. Strictly speaking, I think most people are interested in feature film content at HD resolutions, so 24/25 fps at 1920x1080 or 1280x720. Bitrate constraints derived from the standards. 18 mbits/s (720p ATSC HDTV ceiling). 25 mbits/s (1080 ATSC HDTV). 27 mbits/s (HD-DVD).

For H.264 samples I use what I can find. If you have suggestions, I'd like to hear them.

BTW, as I am not an H.264 expert, what features does H.264 have for coding interlaced video?
--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[digigami]

how did you compare, and what makes you say which result is better than the other (objective metrics, subjective assessment ?), etc.

This is how I compare things:
http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/screen.php?screen=comparesplit

I wrote this tool specifically so I can have these kinds of discussions without the dialogue descending into mud-slinging and religious fervour.

I can compare side by side with split screen:
Source/MPEG-2
Source/H.264
MPEG-2/H.264
MPEG-2/MPEG-2

Also, can compare pixel residue (actual per-pixel frame differences) which is useful for picking up differences too fine for the eyes to see.

How do you compare?

Gen

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[Sagittaire]

Hi -

Thanks for the responses. Currently, the primary marketing thrust of H.264 is that it can compress HD feature films down into the same bitrates as standard definition DVD. Our marketing is aimed at demonstrating that MPEG-2 VBR is a viable alternative to H.264 for this purpose. As I stated in my blog, I am willing to do comparative analysis. I am not interested in comparing 5s test clips of random camcorder footage, but rather professionally produced feature film/motion graphics/TV content.

It is not strictly marketing. Both our MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 VBR encoders are producing HD bitstreams with average bitrates well below 9mbs/s. If you look about 1 year ago we were promoting our MPEG-1 encoder as an alternative to Real/Flash for streaming video. You will also find a 1/2 D1 NTSC MPEG-2 sample for DVD on our web site at 0.5mbs/s. There's a consistent theme here - not an isolated incident.

In the last 24 hours I produced a 1280x720x50 fps version of the Mako Shark Club Jacket sample to HD-DVD specs, average bitrate 11 mbits/s and the quality is essentially perfect.

In order for MPEG-2 VBR to be a viable alternative to H.264, it does not have to be better, it merely needs to be comparable.

As far as the quality goes, the clips on our site speak for themselves.

Gen


Well 11 Mbps for 1280*720*50 or 1920*1088*25 is very high bitrate for H264. Apple QT7 AVC done very good result with 1920*1088*25 trailers sources (very uncompressible sources) and it isn't by far the best AVC encoder. Try with 1.1 Mbps and with good H264 codec and see the result ... !!!

Here little H264 1280*720 (http://multimediacom.free.fr/Download/x264HP_IceAge_720p_1250.mp4) encoding at 1250 Mbps ... try to make that with MPEG1/2 ...

I test your demo encoder and it isn't visually very better than the other popular MPEG2 encoder. Say "MPEG2 is better than H264" (source? bitrate? average quant? subjective? objective?) is totaly ridiculous ...

I have little challenge for you : try to prove that your MPEG2 encoder is the best for metric ...
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=98633

[digigami]

I have little challenge for you : try to prove that your MPEG2 encoder is the best for metric ...
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=98633

At SD resolutions, the smaller DCT block size in H.264 is definitely an advantage. Not so much of an advantage for 720p and definitely not an advantage for 1080p.

I will look at it. From what source did you obtain the trailer? DVD?

- Gen

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[digigami]

little H264 1280*720 (http://multimediacom.free.fr/Download/x264HP_IceAge_720p_1250.mp4) encoding at 1250 Mbps ... try to make that with MPEG1/2 ...

This file plays as garbage in QuickTime. I also tried VideoLAN.

What playback system do you recommend.

Also, what source was used in the compression?

Gen
--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[Sagittaire]

At SD resolutions, the smaller DCT block size in H.264 is definitely an advantage. Not so much of an advantage for 720p and definitely not an advantage for 1080p.

I will look at it. From what source did you obtain the trailer? DVD?

- Gen

It's just a little challenge only for MPEG2 encoder (libavcodec, TMPGEnc, CCE, Procoder, HCEnc, QEnc).

First I think That you must prove that your MPEG2 encoder is better and by far than the other encoder.

My source is an HPII DVD trailler at 5 Mbps.

[Sagittaire]

This file plays as garbage in QuickTime. I also tried VideoLAN.

What playback system do you recommend.

Also, what source was used in the compression?

Gen

H264 High Profil. Play fine on Sempron 2.1 Ghz (win OS) with:
- VLC player 0.8.2
- Media Classic Player (ffdshow or nero filter)
- Nero ShowTime

Source are here
http://www.apple.com/trailers/

Make with these source (MPEG4 ASP full HD)
http://forum.surdvd.com/viewtopic.php?t=43651

[digigami]

I have little challenge for you : try to prove that your MPEG2 encoder is the best for metric ...
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=98633

OK, I downloaded your 'source'. Let me get this straight. You want to do a codec comparison using a DVD VOB as the source material?

Trailers are the lowest class citizens in the DVD compression universe. They are generally quite filtered and encoded at a lower bitrate than titles.

If you are going to run your encoding challenge using compressed material, I suggest using a segment from a Superbit encoded DVD title, and I suggest avoiding CG oriented material as it tends to lack the noise characteristics which make encoding actual photography difficult.

http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/blog/2005_06_19_archives.html

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[Sagittaire]

OK, I downloaded your 'source'. Let me get this straight. You want to do a codec comparison using a DVD VOB as the source material?

It's high quality source 5 Mbps MP@ML

The little challenge is to make the highest possible quality for reencoding with MPEG2 MP@ML with only 1.8 Mbps

[Sagittaire]

and if you want another challenge test your encoder with this hardest sample
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=104484

[JohnV]

digigami: I'm downloading your QT source, but your server is very slow atm. Gives only like 3-7 kB/s, so it takes a very long time. I'm not a fan of any marketing claims, but I think it can be agreed that the lower the bitrate used, the higher the advantage for h.264 (in case of a good h.264 encoder, not Apple's...).

In the meantime take Sagittaire's challenge and host your MPEG2 1250kbps and 2500kbps (twice the h.264 bitrate) versions of Sagittaire's clip. :)

[Sharktooth]

digigami: Mpeg-1/2 will NEVER and i repeat NEVER reach MPEG4-ASP or AVC efficiency.
Quicktime (or CrapTime as i call it...) is a ridicolous encoder and doesnt even exploit half of he capabilities of h.264.
Get a serious encoder (x264), learn how to set it up and compare your MPEG1/2 encoders with it.
There's only one guarantee, mpeg1/2 will be trashed.

[digigami]

digigami: I'm downloading your QT source but your server is very slow atm. Gives only like 3-7 kB/s, so it takes a very long time.
Yes that server is likely under heavy load right now.

I'm not a fan of any marketing claims, but I think it can be agreed that the lower the bitrate used, the higher the advantage for h.264 (in case of a good h.264 encoder, not Apple's...).
The advantages of H.264 are smaller DCT block size, support for framerates less than 24fps and hindsight. There is no question it has the edge. My point is that under the conditions for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, MPEG-2 VBR is a capable and viable choice for putting feature films on optical discs.

In the meantime take Sagittaire's challenge and host your MPEG2 1250kbps and 2500kbps (twice the h.264 bitrate) versions of Sagittaire's clip. :)
I am transcoding the 1080p Ice Age trailer. However, I will say, that the AVC version of this that he provided does not play on my Mac on either QT or VideoLAN. You're a H.264 person - who is to blame for this?

As far as transcoding the Harry Potter trailer, this has nothing to do with our press release which is about HD frame sizes, bitrates and HD-DVD and Blu-Ray applications. SD is over. MPEG-2 won.

I think it is interesting that this thread died when I asked for technical details regarding the 'blockiness' complaints over the first HD MPEG-1 clip.

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[Sharktooth]

Update your VLC to a nightly version (0.85) and dont even try the QuickTime decoder/player coz it's b0rked as HELL.
As i said QT does not come even close the half of what h.264 can do...

EDIT: However you're telling us something like a 20 years old overclocked CPU can beat or be comparable to the actual ones... please...

[digigami]

As i said QT does not come even close the half of what h.264 can do...

That's good, because both our MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 VBR can reduce most QT H.264 to about half the size.

Like I said, we're in the ballpark. We don't have to beat H.264, just remain competitive.

Any our MPEG-1 VBR files play on PIII machines without dropping frames. They play on Macs. They play on Linux machines. They play on Windows.
File size and bitrate are not the only factors.

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[digigami]

EDIT: However you're telling us something like a 20 years old overclocked CPU can beat or be comparable to the actual ones... please...

It is unfortunate, but I'm afraid your analogy is incorrect. To determine the best possible job that MPEG-1 can do you must do a mathematically analysis on the smallest possible representation of each frame possible with MPEG-1 bitstream syntax.

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[digigami]

CPU can beat or be comparable to the actual ones... please...

In actuality, the increase in processor performance is actually quite useful to everyone.

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[JohnV]

I am transcoding the 1080p Ice Age trailer. However, I will say, that the AVC version of this that he provided does not play on my Mac on either QT or VideoLAN. You're a H.264 person - who is to blame for this?
You.. :) It plays ok at least with VideoLan 0.8.4a available from its main site.
And forget QuickTime and its AVC already. At least change to x264 and VideoLan or something on your MAC..

[digigami]

Update your VLC to a nightly version (0.85)

So let me get this straight: in order to even play his H.264 Ice Age file I have to go to a developer-only prerelease build that was just released last week?

Interesting. If you install Windows NT 4.0 on a P3 with a decent video card, I'm pretty sure my MPEG-1 files will play without dropping frames.

If you go and look at the H.264 chipsets that they are considering for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, I'd be surprised if they were using H.264 features that aggressively.

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[Sharktooth]

ok... post a 1000kbps encoding (without any filtering etc) with your mpeg1 or 2 encoder of this clip: http://multimediacom.free.fr/Download/lossless.avi

we'll see what your encoder can do...

[JohnV]

So let me get this straight: in order to even play his H.264 Ice Age file I have to go to a developer-only prerelease build that was just released last week?

Interesting.
No, it plays on old VLC 0.8.2, and it plays on VLC 0.8.4a currently available on the main site.. You don't need any nightly builds.

[Sharktooth]

So let me get this straight: in order to even play his H.264 Ice Age file I have to go to a developer-only prerelease build that was just released last week?

Interesting. If you install Windows NT 4.0 on a P3 with a decent video card, I'm pretty sure my MPEG-1 files will play without dropping frames.

If you go and look at the H.264 chipsets that they are considering for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, I'd be surprised if they were using H.264 features that aggressively.
no... the stable release is able to play it back, but since you're running into problems i suggested to use a nightly build.
also the chips for avc playback are not a problem... they're in production phase.
i'm sorry but it's ppl like you that kills any technology advantage with false claims...
produce that 1000kbps encode (some posts above) and prove your encoder can be on par with AVC otherwise get back in your dreams of presumption.

[digigami]

At least change to x264 and VideoLan or something on your MAC..

I tried it in VideoLAN. It didn't even open a video window.

As far as forgetting about QuickTime/Apple, in case you didn't notice, they are about to take over the consumer video space with H.264, so I'm not sure ignoring them is a good idea.

BTW, how many profiles for HD encoding are there? Do you happen to known which H.264 profiles are spec'ed for HD-DVD?

Gen
--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[Sharktooth]

AFAIK AVC High Profile was implemented to be used with HD-DVD and HD-DVB (broadcast)...
im still waiting your encode...

[digigami]

produce that 1000kbps encode (some posts above) and prove your encoder can be on par with AVC otherwise get back in your dreams of presumption.

Go ahead and produce an uncompressed HD source 720p or 1080p and we can have a discussion. Right now we are using QuickTime H.264 material as the sources? Pretty interesting considering the comments about QT on these boards.

I'm compressing my samples for our website from Pixlet 720p on lossless quality.

Have you even looked at any of our samples? I'm not interested in religious discussions. Either do some analysis or find another thread to rant on.

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[Sharktooth]

gimme a sample and i'll prove the falseness of your statements.
btw why dont you try encoding that sample?
scared by the inefficiency of mpeg1/2?

[Sagittaire]

The advantages of H.264 are smaller DCT block size, support for framerates less than 24fps and hindsight. There is no question it has the edge. My point is that under the conditions for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, MPEG-2 VBR is a capable and viable choice for putting feature films on optical discs.

Yes ... certainely but say "MPEG2 is a good choice for BR/HD-DVD" is not "MPEG2 is more efficient than H264 for BR/HD-DVD".

I agree with first affirmation but certainely not with the second ... :D

And H264 advantage is not only smaller DCT block size ... ;-)

[Sharktooth]

he doesnt even know the h.264 specs...
he just based his assumption on QuckTime (in)efficiency...

[digigami]

Yes ... certainely but say "MPEG2 is a good choice for BR/HD-DVD" is not "MPEG2 is more efficient than H264 for BR/HD-DVD".

I am saying the former, and so we agree. I am also stating that under some conditions our encoder can produce smaller files. Our release also states that for material with high color saturation there is no question, H.264 is superior.

Nowhere have I stated that MPEG-2 is superior to H.264 in any respect. I have simply stated that with a good HD encoder it is a viable and useful alternative.

BTW, what is the minimum CPU/Clock for your AVC sample compressed from Ice Age. Also, which trailer is it?

My first pass on MPEG-1 VBR is 51MB. So you are 4x more efficient with a codec that is 10 years newer. However, my average bitrate is only 3mbs/s which is perfectly in line with our claims that our encoder can do HD at DVD bitrates.

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[Sharktooth]

well... maybe someone has something to say...
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6773621&&#post6773621
now... please wake up :)

[Sagittaire]

I make HD test actually ... try High Detail level source like that
http://www.apple.com/trailers/dreamworks/overthehedge/hd/

I think that quality can be very good with H264 1080p at 2 Mbps and H264 720p at 1.5 Mbps. Try to make MPEG2 encoding with these bitrate.

[digigami]

I agree with first affirmation but certainely not with the second ...

So now let's go over the advantages of doing HD file sharing in MPEG-1 or MPEG-2 VBR. It is clear that our encoder can produce the streams at well under 10 mbits.

So the advantages are:
Play without dropping frames on lower class of machines.
No special downloads required to view files. Windows Media, QT and VLC all play them fine.
Largest installed base of players.

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[digigami]

well... maybe someone has something to say...
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6773621&&#post6773621
now... please wake up :)

In June 05, I showed Ben Waggoner our HD MPEG-1 VBR samples and he told me that it looked good and if our MPEG-2 worked with DVDSP HD-DVD it would be valuable:

Gen,
Get that working in MPEG-2 with 1080i60 w/ 3:2 pulldown that's DVDSP4 compatible for HD DVD titles, and you'd have something really valuable. Apple's H.264 is only 720p50/60 right now, and their HD MPEG-2 has a minimum 10 Mbps average bitrate.
-Ben

On Jun 18, 2005, at 1:13 PM, digigami wrote:
Check out our MPEG-1 VBR for mass HD distribution:
http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/samples.php

The main benefit / difference between our MPEG-1 VBR and H.264 is that we can reach Linux and Windows desktops (and pre-QT6 desktops) that don't have QuickTime installed. The bitrates and quality are comparable to the HD trailers from the QuickTime HD gallery.

And, like you said, it's HD at standard DVD bitrates.

Gen

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.

[Sharktooth]

Advantages of h.264:
Completely new and much more efficient technology.
6x lower bitrates for the same Mpeg2 quality.
DVD quality at DSL bitrates.
HD at DSL bitrates.
More than 5 hours (and easily even more) of recording on a single standard DVD at DVD quality.
Coupled with AAC audio the best and most efficient Audio/Video tech in the world.
VERY MUCH HIGHER encoding speed than digigami encoder :p
Estabilished solution in industry standards (chips are already in production and software players for PCs and MACs already exists).
etc...
should i continue?


also im not intereste in already encoded samples... only in lossless stuff so we can compare.

[digigami]

I make HD test actually ... try High Detail level source like that
http://www.apple.com/trailers/dreamworks/overthehedge/hd/
I think that quality can be very good with H264 1080p at 2 Mbps and H264 720p at 1.5 Mbps. Try to make MPEG2 encoding with these bitrate.

Those are very good rates, and is probably below what is possible for us right now, but it may be possible in the future.

At those rates have you measured the loss of high-frequency detail? Because if you take a SD frame and upsample it to HD it is equivalent to throwing away 1-2 pixels of detail through filtering.

--------------------------------------------------
Digigami
MegaPEG MPEG-2 Encoder (http://www.digigami.com/megapeg/) - people disagree as to whether it's any good.
MPressionist MPEG-2 Analyzer (http://www.digigami.com/mpressionist/) - no disagreements with this one, everybody likes it.