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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
16th May 2013, 18:42 | #101 | Link |
もこたんインしたお!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Finland / Japan
Posts: 512
|
Someone asked me to build vpxenc and vpxdec from the current VP9 experimental branch with just VP9, so here we go.
Enjoy, and feel free to test. Edit: Dear BBB said he'd like it if I'd publish the settings I compiled with as well I later also learned that just --disable-vp8 would would have worked the same way for disabling VP8 functionality. Code:
./configure --enable-vp9 --disable-vp8-encoder --disable-vp8-decoder
__________________
[I'm human, no debug]
Last edited by JEEB; 16th May 2013 at 20:03. |
16th May 2013, 18:43 | #102 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,125
|
Frost also said that the VP9 bitstream will be frozen on 17 June, with Google's Chrome web browser and Chrome OS to implement VP9 by default.
Source: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2267629/webm-project-says-vp9-video-codec-is-nearing-completion Mozilla was asked this today: user: Google said VP9's bitstream will be frozen on 17th june, are you guys still making Daala? mozilla ceo (brendan eich): Yes, we are. Daala aims to be more forward looking & different. VP9 given the schedule is more incremental. Quote:
Last edited by hajj_3; 16th May 2013 at 19:58. |
|
16th May 2013, 21:04 | #103 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 201
|
No, it's not supported in lossy webp at all (yet). They're still thinking about how to add it:
https://groups.google.com/a/webmproject.org/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/webp-discuss/mCWm8IjAYJc On the other hand he could have saved it as a lossless webp file. |
17th May 2013, 08:38 | #106 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,125
|
Quote:
Here is the VP9 google i/o talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6JshvblIcM Last edited by hajj_3; 17th May 2013 at 09:06. |
|
17th May 2013, 10:58 | #107 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 930
|
Quote:
|
|
17th May 2013, 11:46 | #108 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 201
|
Quote:
* have a recent enough Chrome (28+) * visit chrome://flags/ and turn VP9 on * restart chrome * Join Youtube HTML5 demo here http://www.youtube.com/html5 * View items on those VP9 playlists You can test what codec you're getting by right clicking and choosing show video info. Last edited by dapperdan; 17th May 2013 at 11:56. |
|
17th May 2013, 15:18 | #109 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 930
|
Quote:
|
|
18th May 2013, 09:35 | #110 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 197
|
Quick visual comparison using default Main HM 10 configs and "suggested" VP9 settings on latest experimental libvpx (5f3612c) compiled without any special switches.
Key interval at 32. 2pass VP9 bitrate matched against QP34 HEVC on a Sintel clip. Here are the bitstreams and a convenient side-by-side cropping+recomposition in predictive lossless. And this is an extra convenient, if slightly (edit: much) less accurate, version on Youtube. I've learned my lesson and turned off comments. I don't think there's anything new to see here, but it's good to touch base occasionally. The only think left to do is quantify bd-rate differences once the bitstream is finalized and perhaps revisit the codec once or twice a year to determine perceptual encoding improvements. At least the folks at MSU will be on top of the last bit. There's also an in-progress encode using a Tears of Steel clip that I might edit in later if it finishes in a timely manner. Thank you for the quick rundown. Do you have a general sense of "inherent" computational complexity vs HEVC? It occurred to me that VP9's speed advantage over the HM is perplexingly minor despite the former's assembly optimizations. On my system, normal VP9 is "only" 1.3x-1.5x as fast as reference HEVC, which is great for now, but the HM isn't a 'real' encoder. If VP9 is forced to go C-only (--disable-mmx/sse#), theoretically putting it on the same level as HEVC, it slows down by a magnitude. Last edited by xooyoozoo; 18th May 2013 at 21:47. Reason: words |
18th May 2013, 19:53 | #112 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 197
|
The encoding machine has a quad-core Nehalem i7 @ 3.5GHz, and the encoders were compiled with gcc-4.8 -O3 -flto -funroll-loops.
I don't have exact numbers, but the clip above took ~3-3.5 hours for HEVC and ~2.5 hours for VP9. Both were single-threaded. This is pure conjecture, but I'd predict that in the medium term, clever optimizations would increase speed by about a magnitude over reference C-code, and assembly optimizations would then speed things by another magnitude. |
18th May 2013, 23:23 | #114 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY (USA)
Posts: 109
|
Quote:
Quote:
Other than that, nice rundown, thanks for writing it up. |
||
19th May 2013, 11:07 | #116 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 930
|
Quote:
|
|
19th May 2013, 11:10 | #117 | Link |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,346
|
No. thats how that weird site works.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders |
19th May 2013, 16:11 | #118 | Link |
/人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Russia
Posts: 643
|
They lie too much.
Can you explain this? This is screenshot from their presentation (stated as 250 kbps encodes), cropped and downscaled to 720p: http://4.firepic.org/4/images/2013-0...3zi87aj0uy.png This is screenshot of the same frame of encoded video: http://4.firepic.org/4/images/2013-0...84t5fzelr7.png (Source is 720p mp4 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gF58loLxjRk, downscaled to 360p and encoded at 250 kbps bitrate (2-pass, veryslow preset). Screenshot is upscaled to 720p.) Why does it look better than both right (supposed to be x264) and left (vp9) sides? |
19th May 2013, 16:39 | #119 | Link | |
/人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Russia
Posts: 643
|
Because encoding 720p at such bitrate is madness. Even on 240p youtube uses higher bitrate.
Quote:
Probably. But that makes their encode better, not mine. And that's why I can't compare PSNRs (using PSNR in 2013, lol) too. Last edited by vivan; 19th May 2013 at 16:43. |
|
19th May 2013, 17:16 | #120 | Link | ||
/人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Russia
Posts: 643
|
Quote:
Sane person would just downscale an get better result with x264, insane would use vp9. Quote:
x264 is open source. vpxenc is open source. H.264 and H.265 are open - anybody can get specification and write decoder/encoder. VP8 is kinda open, since specification is mess. VP9 is closed, since no specification is avaivable. Also read this. |
||
Tags |
google, ngov, vp8, vp9, vpx, webm |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|