|
The new project of high efficiency video coding standard (HEVC for its acronym in English), also known as H.265, it is expected to be more efficient than its predecessor, H.264 Advanced Video Coding. How much better is the million dollar question. Will it be a improve enough to justify widespread industry adoption of this new standard? |
How efficient is HEVC?
Bin Li, Gary Sullivan, and Xu Jizheng published a performance comparison between H.264 / AVC and HEVC Working Draft 4 in November 2011. You can find the full document and results here:
Table 4 of the document compares the compression performance of the HEVC Test Pattern ("HM") and the H.264 Test Pattern ("JM"). On average, HEVC outperforms H.264 by 39% for random access scenarios (broadcasting, for example) and by 44% for low-delay scenarios (for example, video calls).
This means that the HEVC codec can achieve the same quality as H.264 with a saving bit rate of around 39-44%.
HEVC is still in development, and we can expect to see an increase in performance in future versions of the project.
The end of Webm?
Google announced last year that it has removed support for .H264 video in HTML5 from its Chrome browser. The Internet giant recognizes the importance of this popular video format and that it has played an essential role in recent years, but with this move it hopes to force users to adopt its open codec developed by Google WebM as well as Ogg Theora.
Google has been working for some time on different file formats developed by the same company with which it hopes to displace other codecs and image compression formats, necessary for data transmission on the Internet. In October 2010 it launched WebP, an alternative compression system to JPEG and a few months earlier, in May 2010, WebM as a video codec.
WebM is supported by Mozilla, Opera, and Adobe versus Microsoft and Apple, which are behind H.264. Apple has been supporting and promoting this codec for a long time and Microsoft recently announced that Internet Explorer 9 will bring native support to work with H.264 directly from the browser without the need for a special plug-in, either its own or from third parties. In addition, an important group of chip manufacturers, software developers or peripheral manufacturers such as AMD, ARM, Brightcove, Broadcom, Collabora, Digital Rapids, Encoding.com, Grab Networks, iLinc, INLET, Kaltura, Logitech, MIPS, Nvidia, Ooyala, Qualcomm, Skype, Sorenson, Telestream, Texas Instruments, Verisilicon, ViewCast, and Wildform support this Google initiative.
Google, for its part, has been converting videos to this new format for some time to include them in its popular YouTube video social network and some of them are already accessible, although it is necessary to have a browser with compatibility with the format, which currently can only be Get hold of development versions of Firefox and Opera.
However, it seems that Webm does not finish taking off. For one thing, not all YouTube videos were converted. On the other hand, very few DVD or Blu-ray players support this format. Also, apparently there are several studies that show that Webm is slightly underperforming compared to H.264. Will the development of H.265 be the end of Webm?
First off I want to say great blog! I had a quick question that
I'd like to ask if you do not mind. I was curious to know how you center yourself and clear your head before writing. I have had trouble clearing my thoughts in getting my thoughts out. I do enjoy writing but it just seems like the first 10 to 15 minutes tend to be wasted simply just trying to figure out how to begin. Any recommendations or hints? Appreciate it!
Also visit my web-site ... arise
It is obvious that Google has lacked the desire to make WebM a standard or simply make it a good option for H.264, it simply seems that it is not a project that matters much.
With the arrival of H.265 to WebM it will happen exactly the same as LibreOffice and OpenOffice before the arrival of Office 2007 and 2010, they will simply stay like ants looking up, when the competition takes off the way they did.
The truth is that H265 promises impressive results, for example a full movie in 1080p quality could fit on a CD. Something that will speed up my downloads a lot 🙂
With an 8 Mbps connection, I'm happy that it takes about 2GB, but WELL USED.
The way I see it, WebM has two main problems:
* The most important is that, at the same bit rate, WebM has a much worse quality than H264.
* The other problem is that Google has not bet on raising the quality of WebM and surpass H264, leaving the latter to win the game.
It's a huge shame, but Google can't expect people to use something just because Google champions it. Google has the means and resources to make WebM a competitive codec, and yet it hasn't. One would have to wonder why.
I hope that webm does not give up, vp8 + opus could give a little boost but not enough if in video, if they cannot overcome H.264 with H.265 less but if they do not want the closed codec to continue investing but I do not see the You win the last news I saw on your blog was 1.1.0 (Eider) that promises very minimal improvements, nothing substantial that anime, on the other hand, the opus promises and much as an audio codec beats mp3 in quality
http://blog.webmproject.org/ look