Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

HEIF – High Efficiency Image File Format

nokiatech.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 122 posts

Re: HEIF – High Efficiency Image File Format

#61

Post by threeseed »

_punw wrote: post #53
threeseed wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're confused. WebM is a container not a codec. And either way VP9 and AV1 are simply inferior codecs to H.265 in almost every way. And as for royalty free well that's because MPEG-LA has't ever sued but they did give a royalty free license to Google for patents infringed by VP9. And since Google accepted it does indicate that AV1 is likely to also be patent encumbered. We would all like a royalty free code…

> And either way VP9 and AV1 are simply inferior codecs to H.265 in almost every way. Source? AV1 is already beating HEVC in compression and it's not even finalized yet: https://youtu.be/lzPaldsmJbk?t=2416

VP9 versus H.265: http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Editorial/Featured-Ar...

Also the link you posted is using x265 which as the article suggests was ranked 4th out the 6 available encoders: http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2016/MSU_H...

And whilst AV1 and H.265 are pretty close in PSNR where it is inferior is in vendor support. There are TVs for example available today that natively support H.265 whereas AV1 is still in development. Not to mention all of the terrestrial broadcast providers all using H.265.

Re: HEIF – High Efficiency Image File Format

#62

Post by threeseed »

Veratyr wrote: post #51
niftich wrote: post #20

This seems conceptually most similar to Fabrice Bellard's proposal 'BPG' [1], which was essentially a lightweight wrapper around an HEVC I-frame. The format got small amounts of attention in encoding circles, but didn't pick up mainstream traction. The image encoding layer of HEIF is the same HEVC, but the container is MPEG-4 Part 12 (the Quicktime-descendant ISO Base Media Format; the core behind .mp4, .3gp, etc.),…

> The video codec AV1 currently in development was supposed to be a grand alliance of disparate companies to agree on a common format for the future, and rectify the WebM vs. non-WebM split, but continuing to promulgate sophisticated formats based on work outside of this scope (such as MPEG- or ITU-derived custom formats) just muddies this further. Apple is just blatantly not interested in cooperating with the rest o…

You're talking nonsense. H.265 is an ITU-T standard and was adopted as the standard for broadcast television ATSC. This isn't an Apple developed codec.

And many more companies support it over AoM: http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/HEVC/Pages/Licensors.asp... http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/HEVC/Pages/Licensees.asp... http://www.hevcadvance.com/pdfnew/LicensorList.pdf http://www.hevcadvance.com/pdfnew/LicenseeList.pdf

Including the likes of: BBC, Samsung, Dolby, GE, MediaTek, Philips, Mitsubishi, Warner Bros, Sony etc. And as for hardware vendors well AMD, Intel, Nvidia etc all support H.265.

Re: HEIF – High Efficiency Image File Format

#63

Post by Veratyr »

threeseed wrote: post #61
_punw wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And either way VP9 and AV1 are simply inferior codecs to H.265 in almost every way. Source? AV1 is already beating HEVC in compression and it's not even finalized yet: https://youtu.be/lzPaldsmJbk?t=2416

VP9 versus H.265: http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Editorial/Featured-Ar... Also the link you posted is using x265 which as the article suggests was ranked 4th out the 6 available encoders: http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2016/MSU_H... And whilst AV1 and H.265 are pretty close in PSNR where it is inferior is in vendor support. There are TVs for example available today that natively support H.2…

> the link you posted is using x265 which as the article suggests was ranked 4th out the 6 available encoders

The other encoders there are commercial or not publicly available as far as I can tell, so it's hard to use them as a comparison. Plus according to that PDF, the best encoder is 0.85x x265, which is about the same as AV1 in its present state in the video I linked. And again, AV1 isn't even finalized yet, so I actually find it somewhat impressive that it can already compete against these highly tuned encoders with years of development put into them.

> where it is inferior is in vendor support

Of course there's no vendor support now, the codec isn't even finalized yet. However the codec is backed by Microsoft, Google, Mozilla, Qualcomm, Intel, AMD, ARM, Broadcom, NVIDIA, Adobe, Netflix and the BBC, i.e. all but 1 of the major browser and OS vendors, every major mobile, server and desktop processor company and the 2 most widely used video streaming companies.

Re: HEIF – High Efficiency Image File Format

#64

Post by threeseed »

Veratyr wrote: post #63
threeseed wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VP9 versus H.265: http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Editorial/Featured-Ar... Also the link you posted is using x265 which as the article suggests was ranked 4th out the 6 available encoders: http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2016/MSU_H... And whilst AV1 and H.265 are pretty close in PSNR where it is inferior is in vendor support. There are TVs for example available today that natively support H.2…

> the link you posted is using x265 which as the article suggests was ranked 4th out the 6 available encoders The other encoders there are commercial or not publicly available as far as I can tell, so it's hard to use them as a comparison. Plus according to that PDF, the best encoder is 0.85x x265, which is about the same as AV1 in its present state in the video I linked. And again, AV1 isn't even finalized yet, so I…

H.265 is already in shipping hardware from Sony, LG, Samsung, Intel, AMD, ARM, Nvidia etc. As I listed above there are at least 100+ more companies supporting H.265 than AoM. Including the most important of all the broadcast standard for terrestrial TV which is still hugely popular in many countries.

Also without Apple it's over. YouTube and Netflix will be forced to support H.265 or give up on iOS/OSX users (350 million users).

Re: HEIF – High Efficiency Image File Format

#65

Post by NuDinNou »

pornel wrote: post #40

It makes a lot of sense for Apple to use H.265 as a base for the format. It's much more efficient than all the other JPEG-killers (easily beats WebP by a wide margin). Apple already pays for the patents, and has invested in H.265 hardware and software for H.265 video. However, the HEIF wrapper for H.265 strikes me as quite complex. It brings baggage of ISO wrapper formats and tries to support everything ever crammed…

Let's wait and see what AOMedia[0] response will be to HEIF [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_for_Open_Media

Re: HEIF – High Efficiency Image File Format

#67

Post by Veratyr »

threeseed wrote: post #64
Veratyr wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the link you posted is using x265 which as the article suggests was ranked 4th out the 6 available encoders The other encoders there are commercial or not publicly available as far as I can tell, so it's hard to use them as a comparison. Plus according to that PDF, the best encoder is 0.85x x265, which is about the same as AV1 in its present state in the video I linked. And again, AV1 isn't even finalized yet, so I…

H.265 is already in shipping hardware from Sony, LG, Samsung, Intel, AMD, ARM, Nvidia etc. As I listed above there are at least 100+ more companies supporting H.265 than AoM. Including the most important of all the broadcast standard for terrestrial TV which is still hugely popular in many countries. Also without Apple it's over. YouTube and Netflix will be forced to support H.265 or give up on iOS/OSX users (350 mil…

> As I listed above there are at least 100+ more companies supporting H.265 than AoM.

AV1 isn't finalized yet. Of course HEVC is being shipped in more stuff, it's being shipped at all. I'm not debating this, there's no debate. At present HEVC has more support than a codec that isn't yet finished. H.264 had more support when VP9 was being developed too, that doesn't make VP9 inferior to H.264.

> broadcast standard for terrestrial TV which is still hugely popular in many countries

Broadcast TV is a different world to the web and has very different concerns.

> Also without Apple it's over. YouTube and Netflix will be forced to support H.265 or give up on iOS/OSX users (350 million users).

This is demonstrably not true as YouTube and Netflix both currently and successfully utilize VP9, which Apple doesn't support. Apple users just get the inferior H.264 codec.

The question is really whether the browser and other OS vendors are going to start supporting HEVC and given the current patent situation, that seems impossible, so we're going to end up in a fragmented world where for web streaming, most users get AV1 while Apple users and anyone else who doesn't support AV1 gets H.264.

Re: HEIF – High Efficiency Image File Format

#68

Post by NuDinNou »

threeseed wrote: post #61
_punw wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And either way VP9 and AV1 are simply inferior codecs to H.265 in almost every way. Source? AV1 is already beating HEVC in compression and it's not even finalized yet: https://youtu.be/lzPaldsmJbk?t=2416

VP9 versus H.265: http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Editorial/Featured-Ar... Also the link you posted is using x265 which as the article suggests was ranked 4th out the 6 available encoders: http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2016/MSU_H... And whilst AV1 and H.265 are pretty close in PSNR where it is inferior is in vendor support. There are TVs for example available today that natively support H.2…

> VP9 versus H.265

AV1 it's not same thing as VP9

Re: HEIF – High Efficiency Image File Format

#69

Post by masklinn »

fao_ wrote: post #43
masklinn wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PNG is a lossless format, it's pretty much pointless for photos. IDK about farbfelt but it seems like a TIFF competitor more than anything else. This is an (significant) improvement over JPEG.

> a lossless format [is] pretty much pointless for photos Why is that? Every edit you make to that photo means that the photo will degrade in quality. I always thought JPEG artifacts and compression lossage was a bad thing for photos, not a good thing?

> I always thought JPEG artifacts and compression lossage was a bad thing for photos, not a good thing?

Sure JPEG artefacts are bad, but that can be mitigated (stop compressing so much). Your photos being an order of magnitude larger is worse, and inherent to the way PNG works.

Re: HEIF – High Efficiency Image File Format

#70

Post by Veratyr »

threeseed wrote: post #62
Veratyr wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The video codec AV1 currently in development was supposed to be a grand alliance of disparate companies to agree on a common format for the future, and rectify the WebM vs. non-WebM split, but continuing to promulgate sophisticated formats based on work outside of this scope (such as MPEG- or ITU-derived custom formats) just muddies this further. Apple is just blatantly not interested in cooperating with the rest o…

You're talking nonsense. H.265 is an ITU-T standard and was adopted as the standard for broadcast television ATSC. This isn't an Apple developed codec. And many more companies support it over AoM: http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/HEVC/Pages/Licensors.asp... http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/HEVC/Pages/Licensees.asp... http://www.hevcadvance.com/pdfnew/LicensorList.pdf http://www.hevcadvance.com/pdfnew/LicenseeLi…

> This isn't an Apple developed codec.

I didn't say it was, I said Apple was pursuing it.

> And many more companies support it over AoM

You can't claim that yet as AV1 isn't yet finalized.

Post reply on HN