Live data from Hacker News

AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

videocardz.com

141–150 of 227 posts

Re: AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> camera manufacturers and film crews both do their best to produce a noise-free image This is not correct, camera manufacturers and filmakers engineer _aesthetically pleasing_ noise (randomized grains appear smoother to the human eye than clean uniform pixels). The rest is still as silly as it sounds.

> randomized grains appear smoother to the human eye than clean uniform pixels Does this explain why i dislike 4K content on a 4K TV? Where some series and movies look too realistic, what in turn gives me a amateur film feeling (like somebody made a movie with a smartphone).

This sounds like what is called the soap opera effect:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soap_opera_effect

Which is generally associated with excess denoisong rather than with excess grain.

Re: AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

#142
post #50

Will streaming services ever stop over-compressing their content? I have a top-of-the-line 4K TV and gigabit internet, yet the compression artifacts make everything look like putty. Honestly, the best picture quality I’ve ever seen was over 20 years ago using simple digital rabbit ears. You especially notice the compression on gradients and in dark movie scenes. And yes — my TV is fully calibrated, and I’m paying for…

>the best picture quality I’ve ever seen was over 20 years ago using simple digital rabbit ears.

The biggest jump in quality was when everything was still analog over the air, but getting ready for the digital transition.

Then digital over the air bumped it up a notch.

You could really see this happen on a big CRT monitor with the "All-in-Wonder" television receiver PCI graphics adapter card.

You plugged in your outdoor antenna or indoor rabbit ears to the back of the PC, then tuned in the channels using software.

These were made by ATI before being acquired by AMD, the TV tuner was in a faraday cage right on the same PCB as the early GPU.

The raw analog signal was upscaled to your adapter's resolution setting before going to the CRT so you had pseudo better resolution than a good TV like a Trinitron. You really could see more details and the CRT was smooth as butter.

As the TV broadcaster's entire equipment chain was replaced, like camera lenses, digital sensors and signal processing they eventually had everything in place and working. You could notice these incremental upgrades until a complete digital chain was established as designed. It was really jaw-dropping. This was well in advance of the deadline for digital deployment, so the signal over-the-air was still coming in analog the same old way.

Eventually the broadcast signal switched to digital and the analog lights went out, plus the All-in-Wonder was not ideal with a cheap converter like analog TV's could get by with.

But it was still better than most digital TVs for a few years, then it took years more before you could see the ball in live sports as well as on a CRT anyway.

Now that's about all you've got for full digital resolution, live broadcasts from your local stations, especially live sports from a strong interference-free station over an antenna. You can switch between the antenna and cable and tell the difference when they're both not overly compressed.

The only thing was, digital engineers "forgot" that TV was based on radio (who knew?) so for the vast majority of "listeners" on the fringe reception areas who could get clear audio but usually not a clear picture if any, too bad for you. You're gonna need a bigger antenna, good enough to have gotten you a clear picture during the analog days. Otherwise your "clean" digital audio may silently appear on the screen as video, "hidden" within the sparse blocks of scattered random digital noise. When anything does appear at all.

Re: AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

#143
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Video codec is the most important though !

Are you deaf? I can't see how anyone else would be happy downloading a file they can watch fine but can't hear .

Not to mention that the codec barely tells you anything useful on its own. There are many parameters that affect the quality and file size. And heck it's not even guaranteed that you will be able to watch a video just given its codec. Like an old computer might be able to decode H.264 but only be able to do it in real-time at 480p due to processing requirements for going higher than that.

Re: AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Content delivery costs a lot for streaming services. After content is produced, this is basically the only remaining cost. It’s not surprising that they would go to extreme measures in reducing bitrate. That’s why, presumably, Netflix came up with the algorithm for removing camera grain and adding synthetically generated noise on the client[0], and why YouTube shorts were recently in the news for using extreme denois…

>Content delivery costs a lot for streaming services. The hard disk space to store an episode of a show is $0.01. With peering agreements, the bandwidth of sending the show to a user is free.

>With peering agreements bandwidth of sending the show to a user is free.

I'm not sure why you think this, but it's one of the oddest things I've seen today.

The more streams you can send from a single server the lower your costs are.

Re: AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

#145
post #50

Will streaming services ever stop over-compressing their content? I have a top-of-the-line 4K TV and gigabit internet, yet the compression artifacts make everything look like putty. Honestly, the best picture quality I’ve ever seen was over 20 years ago using simple digital rabbit ears. You especially notice the compression on gradients and in dark movie scenes. And yes — my TV is fully calibrated, and I’m paying for…

Well, you'll be happy to learn that AV2 delivers 30% better quality for the same bitrate!

Re: AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

#146
post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Content delivery costs a lot for streaming services. The hard disk space to store an episode of a show is $0.01. With peering agreements, the bandwidth of sending the show to a user is free.

>With peering agreements bandwidth of sending the show to a user is free. I'm not sure why you think this, but it's one of the oddest things I've seen today. The more streams you can send from a single server the lower your costs are.

Sure, but buying a server is not buying bandwidth. The point of my post is to counter the narrative that streaming video is very expensive.

Re: AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So: 1. camera manufacturers and film crews both do their best to produce a noise-free image 2. in post-production, they add fake noise to the image so it looks more "cinematic" 3. to compress better, streaming services try to remove the noise 4. to hide the insane compression and make it look even slightly natural, the decoder/player adds the noise back Anyone else finding this a bit...insane?

> camera manufacturers and film crews both do their best to produce a noise-free image This is not correct, camera manufacturers and filmakers engineer _aesthetically pleasing_ noise (randomized grains appear smoother to the human eye than clean uniform pixels). The rest is still as silly as it sounds.

Considering how much many camera brands boast their super low noise sensors, I'd still say a very common goal is to have as little noise as possible and then let the director/dop/colorist add grain to their liking. Even something like ARRI's in-camera switchable grain profiles requires a low-noise sensor to begin with.

But yes, there are definitely also many DPs that like their grain baked-in and camera companies that design cameras for that kind of use.

Re: AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

#148
post #31
post #10

30% over AV1 is crazy, it doesn't feel too long since AV1 released but that was in 2019.

Yet I still only got hardware support for it on my first devices last year. The downside of "rapid" iteration on video codecs is that content needs to always be stored in multiple formats (or alternatively battery life on the client suffers from software playback, which is the route e.g. Youtube seems to be preferring).

The main delay the last time was corporations being dicks about IP but the two main culprits have got on board this time.

Re: AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

#149
post #50

Will streaming services ever stop over-compressing their content? I have a top-of-the-line 4K TV and gigabit internet, yet the compression artifacts make everything look like putty. Honestly, the best picture quality I’ve ever seen was over 20 years ago using simple digital rabbit ears. You especially notice the compression on gradients and in dark movie scenes. And yes — my TV is fully calibrated, and I’m paying for…

> Honestly, the best picture quality I’ve ever seen was over 20 years ago using simple digital rabbit ears. That I find super hard to believe!

Why? ATSC is 19Mbps. A single 1080i video using that whole bitrate will look quite good.

Re: AV2 video codec delivers 30% lower bitrate than AV1, final spec due in late 2025

#150
post #41
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While funny, that's not really what I would call accurate. Users get reduced data consumption, potentially higher quality selection if the bandwidth now allows for a higher resolution to be streamed, and possibly lower disk usage should they decide to offline the videos. Better codecs are an overall win for everyone involved.

> Better codecs are an overall win for everyone involved. I don’t remember ever watching a movie and wishing for a better codec, in the last 10 years

How is that relevant to anything?
Post reply on HN