Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ITU Approves H.265 / HEVC Video Codec

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ITU Approves H.265 / HEVC Video Codec

    Phoronix: ITU Approves H.265 / HEVC Video Codec

    The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) on Friday granted first-stage approval for H.265, a.k.a. High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), as the successor to the widely-used H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC video codec...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI4NDA

  • #2
    MPEG LA is going to work with HEVC, so you can expect the same legal situation here as with H264.

    Meanwhile Daala codec is of same quality and free.

    Please go with open technologies and drop this!
    Film Studios should pay for codec technologies, but it should always be free for private and non-commercial entities. Something that MPEG LA never gets.
    Last edited by brosis; 01-26-2013, 10:32 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      There is also VP9 coming, see here, as well as the works for a IETF (opus like) supported codec, see here and here.
      Last edited by oibaf; 01-26-2013, 10:41 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Is there any recent SSIM benchmarks of daala and/or VP9 vs h.265? I'm curious how they compare to each other at this point.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Prescience500 View Post
          Is there any recent SSIM benchmarks of daala and/or VP9 vs h.265? I'm curious how they compare to each other at this point.
          VP9 is still WIP, but see here (post 42).

          Comment


          • #6
            I don't fully understand the numbers, but if I read it correctly, they are really catching up. Super high quality would need work, but I doubt that would be used much outside of blu-ray movies. It would be awesome if VP9 was good enough to become the next html5 video standard. Even better if it could be the new standard for professional hi-def and video recorders, but we'll probably have to wait for daala or VP10 or better for that as that's probably not Google's main priority.

            Comment


            • #7
              50% is best case.

              Qualcom showed their early H265 implementation (on CPU), it was 50% less than H264. But Qualcom engineer stated that 40-45% should be more acureate for most of vids.

              On the happy note:
              VP9 is "only" bigger than H265 by 7% currently. And google aim at 20% less.

              That is very good!

              Now if they could get MIME for WebP and finish its specification......

              Comment


              • #8
                But without Apple and Microsoft support, VP9 is going nowhere as an standard. It's the same situation we have now. In fact, Apple alone can kill any de facto standard just like they did with Flash support in iOS. Not even Google has been able to force with Youtube and Chrome any free standard codec.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by newwen View Post
                  Not even Google has been able to force with Youtube and Chrome any free standard codec.
                  I think Google could have, if YouTube would be VP8-only.
                  I really don't understand why they didn't force all YouTube-videos to be WebM if they want it to be the Internet-standard.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by newwen View Post
                    But without Apple and Microsoft support, VP9 is going nowhere as an standard.
                    See the links I posted before, there is an ongoing work for a IETF approved patent-free video codec standard, similar to the audio codec opus. See also the video codec mailing list for updates. This is however a longer term work then VP9 and Daala. VP9 should be ready soon, Daala will proably converge in the IETF.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thanks to the people posting here ... I'm really grateful on the amount of info they're providing on these new works on the multimedial front !!
                      Now I have some reading material (seriously, didn't know about dalaa and vp9), so I have more options for open video in my apps!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        This is from Jan 17

                        Originally posted by Prescience500 View Post
                        Is there any recent SSIM benchmarks of daala and/or VP9 vs h.265? I'm curious how they compare to each other at this point.


                        I don't think daala is even close to being ready.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by newwen View Post
                          But without Apple and Microsoft support, VP9 is going nowhere as an standard. It's the same situation we have now. In fact, Apple alone can kill any de facto standard just like they did with Flash support in iOS. Not even Google has been able to force with Youtube and Chrome any free standard codec.
                          Microsoft is only relevant on the desktop, now.
                          Apple is an issue, but if they were THAT influential, everyone would be using aac.
                          Android, however, has a huge market share, and since they've started bundling vp9 and opus with chrome, I think it reasonable to expect vp9 (along with hevc) hardware support before too long.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by EvilTwin View Post
                            I think Google could have, if YouTube would be VP8-only.
                            I really don't understand why they didn't force all YouTube-videos to be WebM if they want it to be the Internet-standard.
                            Apart from the likely backlash when trying to force a new unproven video codec upon all end user web software, I think it's also that they didn't have a DRM solution to be implemented into webm, something which is needed (afaik) for the commercial/advertisement videos on Youtube.

                            The latter has likely been rectified with Google's purchase of Widevine (DRM content technology company) but as far as it is ready to be implemented as of yet is unknown. As it stands I'd wager the outpacing of h.264 from Youtube (which according to Google is still going through) will when VP9 has been released and reached maturity/support.

                            Meanwhile you can already use VP8 enabled browsers to view most of the content on youtube (the DRM-laden content being the exception). I use Firefox built in VP8 (no flash installed on my machines) to view videos on Youtube and a greasemonkey script to open said DRM-laden videos with mplayer if I come across them.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by brosis View Post
                              MPEG LA is going to work with HEVC, so you can expect the same legal situation here as with H264.
                              Then ITU can go to hell. Standards are not meant to pad interests of corporations like MPEG LA or somesuch. Doing so just undermines all idea of standards. If you're forced to pay, there will be strong demand for alternatives anyway. F..k you, MPEG LA.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X