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

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

That's just American tv, it's always looked that crappy.
Hevc can turn too Lego also, it's all about compression.

Resolution is nothing without compression

Yeah. Unfortunately, this is where the lighting/music went "high energy" and everything fell apart

[ikms]

Originally Posted by faheem5

(again looking for a pass-through option, but wanting to take advantage of the x265 compression.. if that makes sense)

The only way to "pass-through" x265 is... to start with x265. That will only be possible backing up h.265 Ultra BD (or whatever the 4K extension is being called). Converting anything else to h.265 means transcoding, a process which can get you space savings, but will always incur a PQ loss. If you are willing to stick with 20~40GB files, the hassle of transcoding is not worth it IMO. Re-compressing via x265 is something I would only pursue if you were intent on getting down to the ~5GB / 2 hour feature film level.

Living in Japan I have the (legal) luxury of time-shifting OTA recordings to (AVC-REC) BD-Rs in a variety of compression options. The settop recorders allow up to 10 copies of any non-premium network content (premium is limited to one). For years I would typically transcode the MPEG-2 stream to h.264 in order to fit about four feature films per BD-25. The hit wasn't too bad, but eventually I realized it made no sense to even muck with the PQ when BD-Rs dropped to ~$0.30 a pop. Considering the hundreds of obscure non-retail (or otherwise Twilight-Time exclusive) BD titles I have accumulated this way (Dangerous Days: Blade Runner Documentary, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, The Abyss: SE, ect, ect), the tradeoff in transcoding to save a few pennies just didn't seem worth it, so I moved to straight pass-through recording and never looked back. Typically this means 10~17GB (depends on the channel) for a 2-hour film, so one or two per disc. If/when Japan moves to 8k transmission and x265, I suspect I will be pass-through recording until my eyes bleed. And with the typical retail prices, it isn't hard to imagine why Japanese pre-recorded media sales lag behind the rest of the world.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

Many apologies if this has been brought up here already but is it possible that cable systems might hop right over AVC and go to x265?...

Again -

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Believe me, it's o.k. to refer to it as HEVC.

A reminder…..the contribution document deadline for the next JCT-VC meeting is June 20.

Like so -

Measuring the ROI on HEVC Deployment - YouTube

[Penton-Man]

Richard, keep us informed of any news out of Geneva from either the notes...
http://wftp3.itu.int/av-arch/jctvc-s...5_02_T_Geneva/ or the Document Register.

[Richard Paul]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Richard, keep us informed of any news out of Geneva from either the notes...
http://wftp3.itu.int/av-arch/jctvc-s...5_02_T_Geneva/ or the Document Register.

The Movielabs proposal for more HDR metadata (MaxFALL and MaxCLL) has been added to HEVC. The HDR metadata was mentioned in the Panasonic slides for Ultra HD Blu-ray.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

was mentioned in the Panasonic slides for Ultra HD Blu-ray.

On the other hand , with beaming public endorsements like this from the CEO...he could not "rule out considering an exit strategy"…..http://www.bbc.com/news/business-31523511, I kinda feel sorry for the Sony employees in the TV and associated divisions and I can not rule out them not taking a leadership role in Ultra HD Blu-ray like they did back in-the-day with Blu-ray.

[Penton-Man]

At the last meeting (last month) in Geneva, there was a Call for Evidence (CfE) for high-dynamic range (HDR) and wide color gamut (WCG) video coding which comprise a milestone towards a new video coding format.

The purpose of the CfE was to explore whether or not
(a) the coding efficiency and/or
(b) the functionality of the HEVC Main 10 and Scalable Main 10 profiles can be significantly improved for HDR and WCG content.

See word document… w15083 HDR_WCG CfE in the following download -> http://mpeg.chiariglione.org/standar.../call-evidence

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...there was a Call for Evidence (CfE) for high-dynamic range (HDR) and wide color gamut (WCG) video coding which comprise a milestone towards a new video coding format....

And also a Call for Test Content for HDR and WCG video coding provided in a BT. 2020 container…. http://mpeg.chiariglione.org/standar.../call-1000-and

[Richard Paul]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

At the last meeting (last month) in Geneva, there was a Call for Evidence (CfE) for high-dynamic range (HDR) and wide color gamut (WCG) video coding which comprise a milestone towards a new video coding format.

The purpose of the CfE was to explore whether or not
(a) the coding efficiency and/or
(b) the functionality of the HEVC Main 10 and Scalable Main 10 profiles can be significantly improved for HDR and WCG content.

See word document… w15083 HDR_WCG CfE in the following download -> http://mpeg.chiariglione.org/standar.../call-evidence

They are only looking at 10-bit video which is disappointing since the easiest way to improve HDR is to use 12-bit video. Also besides sounding short sighted it seems a bit late since any new profile wouldn't be released until at least 2017.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

They are only looking at 10-bit video which is disappointing since the easiest way to improve HDR is to use 12-bit video.

Well you know that even Dolby has changed their promotional stance to now *conceding* that 10bit video is sufficient picture quality for HDR. It’s the times and conditions we live in , which effects how high be the bit signal offered. Anyway, be that as it may, meanwhile more from the point of HEVC efficiency, coming up at NAB 2015 -

Implications of High Dynamic Range on the Broadcast Chain for HD and Ultra-HD Content
Sun. April 12| 11:00 AM - 11:30 AM

High dynamic range (HDR) video could offer consumers a much improved viewing experience compared to current broadcast video. The dynamic range of current television images, referred to as standard dynamic range (SDR), is governed by cathode ray tube physics first documented about eighty years ago. The standards include the Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) and the Opto-Electrical Transfer Function (OETF), as defined in Recommendations ITU-R BT.1886 and ITU-R BT.709, respectively. Alternate transfer functions have been defined to support the transmission and rendering of high dynamic range video signals. These new transfer functions exhibit much higher non-linearity compared to the transfer functions used in today's SDR systems. This could lead to several implications on the existing broadcast chain, such as an increase in bitrates required to transmit HDR services and the compatibility of HDR services with existing SDR displays.

This paper studies the impact of such transfer functions on the efficiency of the video compression used for transmission of the content to the final user. Results, in terms of compression efficiency and subjective picture quality, using a single layer High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC, also known as H.265 and MPEG-H Part 2) video compression algorithm are presented. This offers some insight into the question of what bitrates will be required to provide HDR services using existing video compression technology.

Part of: Next Generation Television
Conference: Broadcast Engineering Conference

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

Also besides sounding short sighted it seems a bit late since any new profile wouldn't be released until at least 2017.

In the long run, I think multi-organizational examination and study usually proves of some benefit...somehow.

P.S. One downside to HDR for sports and such, something few mention (or even are aware of) is that especially for those highly sensitive to it, motion blur will be a little more noticeable than with SDR content….which is yet another reason to adopt/implement HFR (100fps and above) to the next generation television UHD recipe of 4K, WCG and HDR.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...referred to as standard dynamic range (SDR), is governed by cathode ray tube physics first documented about eighty years ago....

Reminds me, an additional topic for colorful discussion at another time should be CIE 1931…which is based on vision science from 1931 , the curves of which are still ingrained in SMPTE practices to this day.

[Geoff D]

It's that "non linearity" of all the new acronyms and translating that to standard systems which troubles me the most. I won't be upgrading my 2014 4K TV any time soon so I know that WCG, HDR etc is off the table, fair enough, but I don't want my correctly calibrated SDR Rec.709 4K viewing to suffer for not having been mapped properly in real time from the HDR P3/2020 4K source. You said to me before that this isn't something to be worried about just yet, but it's still gnawing away at me.

I know that early adopters tend to get the shaft in one way or another, but having already missed out on lots of this upcoming 4K tech it'd be a shame if the early 4K owners were penalised yet further with poorly mapped content, and all for helping to get the whole show on the road.

[Richard Paul]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well you know that even Dolby has changed their promotional stance to now *conceding* that 10bit video is sufficient picture quality for HDR. It’s the times and conditions we live in , which effects how high be the bit signal offered.

10-bit HDR will likely be acceptable to consumers though I wish that HDR video could have completely avoided banding. Dolby's early testing with a test pattern showed that 11-bit video was needed to completely avoid banding with HDR video.

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

In the long run, I think multi-organizational examination and study usually proves of some benefit...somehow.

I do think that additional study could generate some useful things.

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's that "non linearity" of all the new acronyms and translating that to standard systems which troubles me the most. I won't be upgrading my 2014 4K TV any time soon so I know that WCG, HDR etc is off the table, fair enough, but I don't want my correctly calibrated SDR Rec.709 4K viewing to suffer for not having been mapped properly in real time from the HDR P3/2020 4K source.

The color space is about twice as big with Rec. 2020 than Rec. 709 and the HEVC examples given for color mapping look good. The color mapping in HEVC can be done per sequence, per frame, or can switch between the two. With HDR the difference is between 48 nits and 10,000 nits and while that is larger HEVC does include a knee function which can be used to compress HDR video. While the information from the BDA has been very basic I think that the studios will want Ultra HD Blu-ray movies to look good on UHDTVs released before 2015 (and the majority of UHDTVs released in 2015).

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

Dolby

I admit to being not much of a fan of theirs (or “expected” others) today for I dislike when Dolby, Technicolor, Philips ? ?? align themselves with a company (planning to offer intellectual property license services) that comes out with a tactical press release like this *coincidentally* 2 weeks prior to NAB 2015…http://www.hevcadvance.com/pdf/HEVC%...ease_final.pdf

For people who don’t understand what all this means in regards to HEVC adoption, cnet breaks it down for you here….http://www.cnet.com/news/patent-grou...tag=CADf328eec

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You said to me before that this isn't something to be worried about just yet, but it's still gnawing away at me.

That I did, especially once the 3x3 matrix, in conjunction with 1D (rather than 3D LUT) approach was proposed. Prior to that, I admit I was a bit concerned for a feasible implementation of real-time decoding and post processing within the computational, memory bandwidth and power constraints of devices at the consumer electronics level based upon using a metatdata/3D LUT solution. Plus, there are layered solutions laying around.

Don’t allow it to gnaw at you.

[Geoff D]

I know Dolby Vision is a "dual layer" HDR system but what about the others? I suppose with the mandatory UHD BD version having 1000 nits max (and then only for highlights) it won't need as much heavy lifting to map it to an SDR output.

[Penton-Man]

metadata in conjunction with something akin to 3x3 matrix1D LUT complexity is single layer….like I thought I’d indicdated above. i.e. it should allow good quality mapping from WCG to BT. 709, so I wouldn’t worry about it with regards to your personal purchasing decision. Single layer solution(s) for HDR -> SDR too.

Hey, you’ve got me scrambling now with the El Clasico post(s) on the other thread, which was news to me. Richard, help him out....I’ve got to see if somehow I can find a rerun of that match either with my cable channel provider or else scrounge off one of the neighbours satellite services before it’s too late and I can never get it. Must think what to bring to the door...bottle of wine, fresh fruit, etc.

Later.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I know Dolby Vision is a "dual layer" HDR system but what about the others?...

See....http://www.4-traders.com/PHILIPS-628...cess-18481721/

I hope my in-a-rush abrupt response above didn’t appear abrasive, for it was not at all intended to be ….I didn’t have time to search for the patent notice. In a nutshell, due to it being less *demanding*, an advantage of a single layer solution is that some users with ‘existing’ chips (as in some older TV models) might not “get the shaft”. Question then becomes…will the quality be as good as dual-layer HDR.

[Penton-Man]

I say Good Luck with the *consortium* and your proprietary codec ….http://www.studiodaily.com/2015/04/v...nt-h-264-hevc/

[img eL]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I say Good Luck with the *consortium* and your proprietary codec ….http://www.studiodaily.com/2015/04/v...nt-h-264-hevc/

Is this a April fools joke or Vapor