New H.265 twice as efficient as H.264!

[IndyMLVC]

Did a quick search and couldn't find anything on this:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/15/m...ideo-standard/

What are the chances ANY of our players would be able to play this codec?

[IndyMLVC]

Interesting:

In addition to mobile applications, H.265/HEVC will support up to 8K or 4320p (7680×4320) resolution, just in time for an industry push towards 4K HDTV in the coming years. The decrease in bandwidth requirements per stream could also allow more streams to be transmitted within the same frequency.

[lazystoner]

I assume we can call this MPEG-5?

[swifty7]

so what's better this or mkv?

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by swifty7

so what's better this or mkv?

MKV is just a container. The codec most commonly used in MKV is H.264.

[bhampton]

I can't wait for H.266

[budious]

Woohoo for longer encode times... bring on the 128 core cpus!

[vargo]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

What are the chances ANY of our players would be able to play this codec?

Zero.

Bluray players and other hardware devices rely on hardware decoders. The chipsets can decode exactly what they were designed for and nothing more.

If you've a reasonably powerful CPU in your PC you should be able to software decode it, or with an upgrade to a future GPU that has a HEVC hardware decoder.

[swifty7]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

MKV is just a container. The codec most commonly used in MKV is H.264.

oh yeah!! that's right!! silly me to ask such a question.

[AngelGraves13]

I hope the 4K blu-rays make use of this.

1080p would also look much better with this...higher bitrate!

[rdodolak]

HEVC (H.265) Adoption Is At Least 5 Years Away For Consumer Content Services

(CES) Broadcom chip ushers in H.265 and UltraHD video

[Mavrick]

H.265 has been approved by the ITU.

http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/25/h265-is-approved/

The ITU has approved a new video format that could bring 4k video to future broadband networks, while also making streaming HD video available even on bandwidth-constrained mobile networks. The H.265 standard, also informally known as High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), is designed to provide high-quality streaming video, even on low-bandwidth networks.

The new video format is the successor to the H.264 codec, which nearly every video publisher has standardized after the release of the iPad and several other connected devices. It seems crazy now, but once upon a time, Apple’s adoption of H.264 and insistence on HTML5-based video players was controversial — especially since most video before the iPad was encoded in VP6 to play through Adobe’s proprietary Flash player.

The hope is that, through improved compression techniques, H.265 will enable publishers to stream 1080p video with about half as many bits as required today. That should make true streaming HD video available not just in broadband households, but on mobile and tablet devices, using networks that are a lot more bandwidth-constrained. Doing so could make online video more widely available in markets with poor connectivity or mostly mobile connections.

In places where there is decent broadband connectivity, H.265 could enable even higher-quality video. With 4K TVs finally becoming available, there’s an opportunity for even greater video resolution. The only problem is that networks aren’t built to support the load that streaming that video would require. With H.265, 4K streaming could be possible with as little as 20-30 Mbps of bandwidth. Still a lot by today’s standards, but not completely unheard of.

Of course, just because the format has been approved doesn’t mean that we’ll start seeing video files shrink or lower bit-rate streams anytime soon. While there will likely be software-based encoders available by the end of the year, the codec won’t see mass adoption until it gets embedded into chips and hardware. It could be 12 to 18 months, maybe longer, before the first devices with H.265 hardware acceleration make it to market.

Once those initial devices do make it to market, however, we can probably expect a quick ramp up in the amount of content that begins to take advantage of H.265. Since the launch of the iPad, the percentage of video published in H.264 has climbed from less than 10 percent to more than 84 percent in less than three years, according to MeFeedia.

The adoption of H.265 could mean less network strain, more HD video, or some combination of the two. I personally expect that the availability of a more efficient codec will more likely mean higher quality rather than smaller video files, but every little bit helps.

[img eL]

Originally Posted by Mavrick

H.265 has been approved by the ITU.

http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/25/h265-is-approved/

It's a big step, h.265 has been going through the pace's for years. The approval is just first stage approval so who knows how much longer h.265 HEVC will be completely official

[5th Of November]

I just saw this posted in the Technology section on Google News.

http://www.slashgear.com/new-h-265-v...ates-27266856/

http://hothardware.com/News/ITU-Appr...eaming-Video-/

If this only needs half the bit rate, then wouldn't it allow 4K enough space to fit on a 50 GB Blu-ray? I realize that the studios would have to quit putting extra stuff on the same disc as the movie, but why wouldn't it work? It would be cheaper for them to put the movie on one disc and any extras on a second disc, than it would for them to start using 100/128 GB BDXL discs. All that would have to be done is making new players that play the codec, just like they did with 3D. The discs can stay the same.

[vargo]

Originally Posted by 5th Of November

I just saw this posted in the Technology section on Google News.

http://www.slashgear.com/new-h-265-v...ates-27266856/

http://hothardware.com/News/ITU-Appr...eaming-Video-/

If this only needs half the bit rate, then wouldn't it allow 4K enough space to fit on a 50 GB Blu-ray? I realize that the studios would have to quit putting extra stuff on the same disc as the movie, but why wouldn't it work? It would be cheaper for them to put the movie on one disc and any extras on a second disc, than it would for them to start using 100/128 GB BDXL discs. All that would have to be done is making new players that play the codec, just like they did with 3D. The discs can stay the same.

It would make more sense to include BDXL compatibilty as part of the spec.

[lobosrul]

Originally Posted by 5th Of November

If this only needs half the bit rate, then wouldn't it allow 4K enough space to fit on a 50 GB Blu-ray? I realize that the studios would have to quit putting extra stuff on the same disc as the movie, but why wouldn't it work? It would be cheaper for them to put the movie on one disc and any extras on a second disc, than it would for them to start using 100/128 GB BDXL discs. All that would have to be done is making new players that play the codec, just like they did with 3D. The discs can stay the same.

4k has FOUR times (2x horizontal, and 2x vertical pixels) the resolution as 1080, not double. So even if h.265 only needs half the bit rate as h.264 (and I've heard its more like 30% than 50) the disc needs to be twice the size, given the same length of content.

[5th Of November]

So if BDXL and H.265 are added to the Blu-ray specs, then 4K should be no problem?

[vargo]

Originally Posted by 5th Of November

So if BDXL and H.265 are added to the Blu-ray specs, then 4K should be no problem?

I don't know if adding to Bluray specs is the correct term. 4K using H.265 is a as different from Bluray as Bluray was from DVD.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by vargo

I don't know if adding to Bluray specs is the correct term. 4K using H.265 is a as different from Bluray as Bluray was from DVD.

The main issue is backwards compatibility with existing Blu-ray players. Even 3-D streams are backwards compatible with old BD players due to H264 enabling this. H265 discs though would not work.

IMO, seeing a new disc-based format for 4k is unlikely as Blu-ray still has yet to fully overtake DVD making 4k physical media adoption slim. The only way it would happen would be if it was rolled out like laserdisc, with $99 movies.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by lobosrul

4k has FOUR times (2x horizontal, and 2x vertical pixels) the resolution as 1080, not double. So even if h.265 only needs half the bit rate as h.264 (and I've heard its more like 30% than 50)....

Lobos Rule!

Wolf Howling - YouTube

C’mon, lobos have got better hearing than that!

Let me tell you about dem humans. Perhaps that 30% figure is true if you think humans only see in ‘PSNR’. The reality is that humans see and process imagery ‘subjectively’. Read the pdf listed in this link for science beyond what you’ve heard…
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread....ly#post6994343

And/or, from a peer-reviewed article by Jens-Rainer Ohm et.al.,
http://www.hhi.fraunhofer.de/fileadm...erformance.pdf

b.t.w., that be the same Jens who co-chairs the JCT-VC committee that did the work on HEVC, which ITU membership recently approved….http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread....189830&page=38

For those having an aversion to plodding through the scientific literature, in essence, evidence shows HEVC subjectively provides ~ 50% bit rate reduction on average compared to H.264/AVC.