NEW H.265 CODEC

[spider]

Isn't very slow much the same as placebo.

The Placebo preset is much slower.

[ItsMeLenny]

The Placebo preset is much slower.

That was in terms of video quality.
There is unnoticeable difference.

[Audionut]

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1677487#post1677487

We were at the NAB show in Las Vegas last week, giving demonstrations to many of the companies attending, showing x265 encodes of popular video sequences side by side with x264 encodes (the gold standard for quality today). Attendees were blown away by the quality of x265. We demonstrated 2 streams played back in sync, showing the middle 50% of two 4K clips on a 4K monitor. Here is a photo of our demo...

[Nautilus]

Samsung Galaxy S5 has just came out and it is equipped with an arm based quad core CPU running at 2.5Ghz frequency. If such powerful processors in very little power envelope can be implemented in small devices such as cell phones and tablets then our DSLR cameras can surely can benefit from them.

I don't think computing power of H.265 encoding will be much of an issue after this point. We hear incredible powerful processors coming out rapidly as well as GPUs. NVIDIA Tegra K1 for instance. It has 192 CUDA cores, supports DX11 and the latest technology yet consumes very little power.

[Audionut]

I don't think computing power of H.265 encoding will be much of an issue after this point.

H.265 is extremely processor intensive.  This is one aspect of the spec that helps it to reduce bitrate.  It's simply a case of running more and more motion estimations, until the least bit hungry one is found.

Intel is currently delivering around 10%/year (give or take) performance increase with each tik or tok, of it's production cycle.  Serious (H.265) performance based development, which likely won't happen until all the main features are implemented, and killer bugs are fixed, is likely to produce 20-50%/year.

Considering --preset veryslow encodes at sub 1fps here (OC'd i2700k), it's likely to still be a few years, before even top of the line desktop systems, can encode in real time.  And there isn't going to be significant amounts of encodes produced by x265, until after, people can encode movies in less then a day.

GPUs are not suitable for high quality video encoding.  There's a reason why HQ GPU based encoders, do not exist. 

The dinky little ARM cpu in your phone, probably only produces around 50% of the processing power of a desktop CPU, for each clock cycle.  It's good for doing lots of simple things at low power, it's useless for video encoding (or anything else processor intensive).

It won't be until dedicated chips are designed and manufactured (specifically for H.265 decoding/encoding), that you will see encoders in consumer based devices such as phones and cameras.  Of course, there are good encoders, and bad encoders.

[spider]

If such powerful processors in very little power envelope can be implemented in small devices such as cell phones and tablets then our DSLR cameras can surely can benefit from them.

I am just doing some tests with x265 (very slow preset) and its encoding at 0.4 fps while the CPU consumes 72 W

[spider]

What do you think?
Which is which?

//edit by Audionut.  Images scaled per forum rules.  Click for full size images.

I am the original





I am encoded with x26x @ 2565 kb/s




I am encoded with x26x @ 2455 kb/s

[nick.p]

Which is which?

H264 and then H265?

[Audionut]

Care to share the x264 command line?
Did you use this psy-rd patch with x265?

Based on images alone, I would say the bottom one is x264.

[spider]

--crf34 --preset veryslow was the x264 command line
psy-rd 1.0 was used in x265 also preset veryslow

[ItsMeLenny]

bit of a pointless test as they're encoded at different bit-rates.
on top of that there are general standards of bit-rate to resolution ratios,
and for fullHD it's quite a bit bigger than 2.5 mbps

[spider]

bit of a pointless test as they're encoded at different bit-rates.

There is nearly no difference

on top of that there are general standards of bit-rate to resolution ratios,
and for fullHD it's quite a bit bigger than 2.5 mbps

Never heard about general standards of bit-rate to resolution ratios.

But nevertheless YouTube uses around 5mbit/s for 1080p encoded with x264 and x265 goal is saving 50% bitrate.

[g3gg0]

What do you think?

i think that is north of the north eastern airfield in DayZ.

[spider]

That's absolutely right

And the first one is encoded with x265 and the second one with x264

[ItsMeLenny]

There is nearly no difference

There's a pretty big difference between all 3 photos, the 2 encoded get incredibly smeary and soft.

[spider]

There's a pretty big difference between all 3 photos, the 2 encoded get incredibly smeary and soft.

You talked about bitrate I answered about bitrate and now you reply about visual.

[Audionut]

And the first one is encoded with x265 and the second one with x264

 

x264 tries really hard to keep sharp detail (at the cost of some blocking), because it looks better in the temporal domain.
x265, just blurs everything.  Of course, x265 is still in its development infancy.  x264 was no better than Xvid, or MPEG2, in its early development cycle.

From what I have seen of the psy-rd patch for x265, it currently isn't doing much at default settings.

To be perfectly honest, considering where x264 started, and where it is now, and where x265 is now, I'm excited to see what x265 will be doing in 1-2 years.

[ItsMeLenny]

You talked about bitrate I answered about bitrate and now you reply about visual.

My bad. But then on the note of bitrate, 100kb is a quite a bit when youve only got 2.5mb to spread around.

[Audionut]

4.5% bitrate difference

For the sake of comparisons, it would be better to be a little closer.  x264 accepts decimal places for CRF.  --crf 34.3 

[Audionut]

x265 got tagged as release 1.1 the other day.  There have been some good improvements since the last time I tested it.

[spider]

Is psy-rd still producing artifacts?

[Audionut]

It's better now.  You may want to try smaller settings (0.2-0.4).

From what I understand, all of the CPU expensive stuff has been translated to ASM, so I imagine we should start to see rate control and quality improvements.

[Canon eos m]

I am using the Divx edition to code and playing on the Divx player. There is not much difference to the visible eye and file sizes are way much smaller.

[tezza]

I can't see this being an 'in-camera' codec for some time yet and 3rd party recorders will have to become much more powerful to record to H.265 externally.

Not only has it arrived (1 year later), it has arrived at a consumer level price.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/samsung-nx1

    28.2 megapixel APS-C BSI-CMOS sensor
    Hybrid AF system with 205 phase-detect points covering 90% of the frame
    15 fps burst shooting with continuous autofocus
    4K (DCI 4K & UHD) video recording using H.265 codec
    Can output 4:2:0 8-bit 4K video over HDMI
    Stripe pattern AF illuminator with 15m range
    Weather-resistant magnesium alloy body
    Context-sensitive adaptive noise reduction
    3" tilting Super AMOLED touchscreen display
    2.36M dot OLED EVF with 5ms lag
    LCD info display on top of camera
    Built-in 802.11ac Wi-Fi and Bluetooth
    USB 3.0 interface
    Optional battery grip

The only thing I don't like about this camera (for the price), is the retarded lens mount that no one cares about. Dear God I wished they had used micro four thirds (since there are a tonne of active adapters for it).

I'm a wedding photographer. I would totally shoot a wedding with this (in favor of my 5DII) for stills. For video, it's a no-brainer.

If those samsung lenses prove to be sharp, it may well be my next camera(s).

With the hybrid AF system, a 28MP crop sensor, it may be the world's best sports camera.

Of course, pro photographers take a long time to get with the program. Mostly because they are wedded to lenses. Samsung may have shot themselves in the foot with their STUPID STUPID STUPID decision to make their own proprietary lenses, and not allow the customer to choose. This could have been a GH4 killer.

By some freak miracle, metabones might decide to come to the party, but I doubt it. They have to justify their choices based on market share.

[spider]

Looks like marketing to me.
What is better a simple h264 encoder or an even more simple h265 encoder?