H.264

[Jon Allen]

The new H.264 from Apple/Quicktime seems to be an HD-lover's dream come true. This compression type can squeeze 1280x720p frames into streams less than 10Mbit/s.

This seems like it could be the answer to only getting 1 HDD with your Firestore or an 8GB limit on a P2 drive. (1080p @ 8Mbit/s on 8GB card = 2+ hours)

I imagine the only possible limit on this would be the horsepower it takes to compress on the fly. What does everyone else think?

[John Pytlak RIP]

The new H.264 from Apple/Quicktime seems to be an HD-lover's dream come true. This compression type can squeeze 1280x720p frames into streams less than 10Mbit/s.

This seems like it could be the answer to only getting 1 HDD with your Firestore or an 8GB limit on a P2 drive. (1080p @ 8Mbit/s on 8GB card = 2+ hours)

I imagine the only possible limit on this would be the horsepower it takes to compress on the fly. What does everyone else think?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Any visible spatial or temporal compression artifacts? Contouring? How does it look on a big display or screen? Have you seen it with a wide variety of critical scenes (e.g., SMPTE DC28 STEM material?)

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

Look, I can make MPEG-4 take HD down to five hundred kilobits a second, but it won't actually look any good. I suspect from long experience that ten meg H.264 will probably look just as ropey.

 

Phil

[Jon Allen]

From what I saw from the samples Apple has available there were just a few temporal artifacts once in a great while. But also understand, this was saved out for web transmission as opposed to actually going with a 10+Mbit stream (also, I had a render going). So it would seem the quality could be greatly improved if the data rate is boosted by a modest amount (circa 20Mbit/s).

I was watching it on 1600x1200 on a 17 inch monitor, so I don't know how it would perform on a 40" LCD.

Considering Apple just released the QT7 player today, I doubt we'll be seeing a lot of stuff that originated in digital for a while. Although Batman Begins, Fantastic Four, & Serenity trailers looked amazing!

Batman Screenshots

[Elhanan Matos]

The new H.264 from Apple/Quicktime seems to be an HD-lover's dream come true.

 

Just a quick correction, H.264 is not from Apple.

 

Everything you could ever want to know about H.264

[Christopher Bell]

I was told at NAB that atleast one Japanese company is considering H264 for a future solid state HD camera. I am curious to see how good the codec looks.

 

Chris Bell

Edited April 30, 2005 by spotshooter

[Guest Jim Murdoch]

The new H.264 from Apple/Quicktime seems to be an HD-lover's dream come true. This compression type can squeeze 1280x720p frames into streams less than 10Mbit/s.

This seems like it could be the answer to only getting 1 HDD with your Firestore or an 8GB limit on a P2 drive. (1080p @ 8Mbit/s on 8GB card = 2+ hours)

I imagine the only possible limit on this would be the horsepower it takes to compress on the fly. What does everyone else think?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Whatever became of Wavelet Compression? That was supposed to sweep all before it. MPEG has the advantage that it can be implemented in software with existing PC video cards, but Wavelet Compression was supposed to give much better quality albeit needing inexpensive add-on boards. You were supposed to be able to do broadcast quality SD video editing on an 800MHz PC.

 

I believe it was used for the experimental digital projectors used for Star Wars ep II, but that was the last I heard of it!

[Guest Jim Murdoch]

Any visible spatial or temporal compression artifacts?  Contouring?  How does it look on a big display or screen?  Have you seen it with a wide variety of critical scenes (e.g., SMPTE DC28 STEM material?)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You have been warned before John: UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL HARD FACTS OR EMBARRASSING QUESTIONS BE TOLERATED ON THIS FORUM! :D

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

> You were supposed to be able to do broadcast quality SD video editing on an 800MHz

> PC.

 

Feh, you can do that anyway - it's not about processor speed until you get down to rendering complex effects, and then it's actually easier to do uncompressed! Not a great leveller, I'm afraid.

 

Phil

[Guest Kai.w]

Whatever became of Wavelet Compression? That was supposed to sweep all before it. MPEG has the advantage that it can be implemented in software with existing PC video cards, but Wavelet Compression was supposed to give much better quality albeit needing  inexpensive add-on boards. You were supposed to be able to do broadcast quality SD video editing on an 800MHz PC.

 

I believe it was used for the experimental digital projectors used for Star Wars ep II, but that was the last I heard of it!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think the QuBit used/uses wavelet compression. I saw some digital projections from it (including EII) and image quality was very high at least I could not make out compression artifacts. I think it did look better than mpeg 4... though I have not seen a 1:1 comparison.

 

-k

[David Mullen ASC]

You have been warned before John: UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL HARD FACTS OR EMBARRASSING QUESTIONS BE TOLERATED ON THIS FORUM! :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If you have so little respect for this forum, why keep hanging around it?

[John Pytlak RIP]

If you have so little respect for this forum, why keep hanging around it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think Jim had his tongue in his cheek.

 

I was just asking about things that I would look for in any image that had compression or other compromises. "Easy" scenes don't prove much, that's why demos like the SMPTE DC28 STEM were produced.

[David Mullen ASC]

I was just asking about things that I would look for in any image that had compression or other compromises.  "Easy" scenes don't prove much, that's why demos like the SMPTE DC28 STEM were produced.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In fact, Panasonic was using some of the STEM footage in their demo of the H.264 (plus extensions) compression.

[Tenolian Bell]

Any visible spatial or temporal compression artifacts?  Contouring?  How does it look on a big display or screen? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Apple had a large screen projecting HD at their NAB booth. The screen was around 15 - 20 feet. From what I was told all of the material shown on the screen was Quicktime 7 at HD resolution.

 

I saw scenes from Batman, a music video, a Mercedes Benz commercial. I wasn't really looking for it but I don't recall seeing any compression artifacts or digital problems.

 

In fact in the presentation for Apple Motion they showed what banding looks like and how to use Motion to remedy the problem.

 

 

Whatever became of Wavelet Compression?

 

From what I've read JPEG 2000 uses wavelet transform compression. This codec is to be used in the Digital Cinema Distribution Master. The standard image container from the Digital Cinema Initiave for digital projection.

[Guest Jim Murdoch]

If you have so little respect for this forum, why keep hanging around it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Because it's funnier than the Sunday comics.

[Guest Jim Murdoch]

Hi,

 

> You were supposed to be able to do broadcast quality SD video editing on an 800MHz

> PC.

 

Feh, you can do that anyway - it's not about processor speed until you get down to rendering complex effects, and then it's actually easier to do uncompressed! Not a great leveller, I'm afraid.

 

Phil

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry, perhaps I should have said: "real time" full-bandwidth video. Basically a simple and inexpensive expansion card was supposed to be able to turn an inexpensive PC into a high-power video workstation. Which didn't actually happen due to some oversight:-) I would imagine that if you could do that with an 800MHz PC, you'd be able to do HD on a cheap modern 2.5GHz machine.

[Guest Jim Murdoch]

I think Jim had his tongue in his cheek.

 

I was just asking about things that I would look for in any image that had compression or other compromises.  "Easy" scenes don't prove much, that's why demos like the SMPTE DC28 STEM were produced.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Which is what I've always said: "Give me one of those bloody cameras and I'll show you how 'indistinguishable from film' it is!" The last person I'd take any notice of is the one trying to flog the technology.

 

I remember when the first single-tube home video cameras hit the market in the early 1980s: every manufacturer's demo tape showed lurid scenes of silk flowers and bowls of fruit; nice saturated colours where you couldn't see the effects of coring and the lousy chroma bandwidth!

 

I must admit to being a total loss sometimes: some of the TV shows that have been shot on HD start to look like something out of the Twilight Zone if there is any outdoor illumination on an interior shot (such as a window or a door opening onto the street). Everything is just a huge white blob, but nobody seems to think there's anything wrong with that!

 

Somebody else here proudly posted some frame grabs from a Viper to demonstrate how artifact-free they were; whereas they were actually a textbook example of what's wrong with video cameras!

[Guest Kai.w]

Somebody else here proudly posted some frame grabs from a Viper to demonstrate how artifact-free they were; whereas they were actually a textbook example of what's wrong with video cameras!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Honestly, I think you are getting funny. It was me who posted those frames and I seriously (not proudly!) asked you to point out the artifacts, cause I (in contrast to other people) don't think I've eaten the wisdom with spoons (as we germans say) and am wiling to learn. But you never responded. So, what to say... I'd be glad to give you a link to the topic if you don't find it again.

 

Funny enough this H.264 thread was not even about Videocameras but about compression techniques whereas you bring this old film vs video debate again..

 

 

-k @PanaVisionComplex.org

[Sam Wells]

In fact, Panasonic was using some of the STEM footage in their demo of the H.264 (plus extensions) compression.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What are these extensions ?

 

-Sam

[David Mullen ASC]

There is some latest version or variation of H.264 that involves certain color issues, I believe.

[Guest Jim Murdoch]

Honestly, I think you are getting funny. It was me who posted those frames and I seriously (not proudly!) asked you to point out the artifacts, cause I (in contrast to other people) don't think I've eaten the wisdom with spoons (as we germans say) and am wiling to learn. But you never responded. So, what to say... I'd be glad to give you a link to the topic if you don't find it again.

 

Funny enough this H.264 thread was not even about Videocameras but about compression techniques whereas you bring this old film vs video debate again..

-k @PanaVisionComplex.org

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"Honestly, I think you are getting funny."

Not half as funny as some of the bozos we get on this forum expecting us to believe that THEY have been put in charge of some big expensive production or other...

"It was me who posted those frames and I seriously (not proudly!) asked you to point out the artifacts"

Is there any point? If they're not obvious to you then I think you have some serious problems.

"Funny enough this H.264 thread was not even about Videocameras but about compression technique..."

My point is that some people simply can't seem to see deficiencies in either the compression systems or the cameras they're using, and then they wonder why nobody takes them seriously. Well, nobody important anyway....

[Guest Kai.w]

Not half as funny as some of the bozos we get on this forum expecting us to believe that THEY have been put in charge of some big expensive production or other...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You sound a little paranoid.

 

"It was me who posted those frames and I seriously (not proudly!) asked you to point out the artifacts"

Is there any point? If they're not obvious to you then I think you have some serious problems.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

;-) oh well...

 

"Funny enough this H.264 thread was not even about Videocameras but about compression technique..."

My point is that some people simply can't seem to see deficiencies in either the compression systems or the cameras they're using, and then they wonder why nobody takes them seriously. Well, nobody important anyway....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Ok, maybe to get something at least a little interesting I found this little "codec shootout". It's a little dated but still the best I've ever seen.

The nero digital avc is equivalent to H264.

 

http://www.doom9.org/index.html?/codecs-104-1.htm

 

-k

[David Mullen ASC]

Not half as funny as some of the bozos we get on this forum expecting us to believe that THEY have been put in charge of some big expensive production or other...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who are you referring to?

[nchopp]

Who are you referring to?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Our good friend Mr. Murdoch, is, of course referring to just about everyone here - as that covers all he's offended, attacked, insulted, and\or smeared.

 

Panavision's out to take over the world!!!

 

<runs to toss in Conspiracy Theory, it's been a while>

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

> Sorry, perhaps I should have said: "real time" full-bandwidth video.

 

If you mean playback, sure, yes.

 

If you mean something else - some kind of grading or effects, perhaps - then that's kind of a meaningless measurement because there's always going to be some kind of technique or filter that can't be done in realtime, all the way up to the highest levels.

 

I can build you an 800MHz PC which can run out realtime SD if you want one.

 

Phil