31–40 of 227 posts
30% over AV1 is crazy, it doesn't feel too long since AV1 released but that was in 2019.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s more money and more user’s compute being thrown at the problem to get the streaming service’s CDN bill down.
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.
They also get increased power usage, lesser battery life, higher energy bills, and potentially earlier device failures.
> Better codecs are an overall win for everyone involved.
Right.
I always thought the name AV1 was partly a play on/homage to AVI (Audio Video Interlace), but AV2 breaks that. Even if it’s meant to be embedded into other container formats such as MP4, there are files with the .av1 extension and there is a video/AV1 MIME type (and possibly a UTI?). Does this mean we now need to duplicate all that to .av2 and video/AV2? What about the AVIF file format?
Do you mean the file extension should only reflect the file format and not the codecs it has inside ? Maybe that’s what we did in the past and it was a bad idea. It’d be useful to know if you can read the file by looking only at its extension
That's pretty much always been the case. File extensions are just not expressive enough to capture all the nuances of audio and video codecs. MIME types are a bit better.
Audio is a bit of an exception with the popularity of MP3 (which is both a codec and a relatively minimal container format for it).
May be more data and numbers. Including Encoding Complexity increase, decoding complexity. Hardware Decoder roadmap. Compliance and Test kits. Future Profile. Involvement and improvement to both AVIF the format and the AV2 image codec. Better than JPEG-XL? Are the ~30% BDRATE compared to current best AV1 encoder or AV1 1.0 as anchor point? Live Encoding improvements?
[1] https://aomedia.org/events/live-session-the-future-of-innova...
All this high speed fiber for nothing...
I wait on new codec invented #AI
You'll be waiting for a long time then, probably. Making codecs is actually a hard problem, the type of thing that AI completely falls over when tasked with.
It works amazingly well with text compression, for example: https://bellard.org/nncp/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
well we might start streaming 8K content ! Or maybe this could be used for 16K VR videos
It's a shame European energy efficiency rules made 8K non viable. It's a great resolution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'll be waiting for a long time then, probably. Making codecs is actually a hard problem, the type of thing that AI completely falls over when tasked with.
Considering AI is good at predicting things and that’s largely what compression does, I could see machine learning techniques being useful as a part of a codec though (which is a completely different thing from asking ChatGPT to write you a codec)
I always thought the name AV1 was partly a play on/homage to AVI (Audio Video Interlace), but AV2 breaks that. Even if it’s meant to be embedded into other container formats such as MP4, there are files with the .av1 extension and there is a video/AV1 MIME type (and possibly a UTI?). Does this mean we now need to duplicate all that to .av2 and video/AV2? What about the AVIF file format?
Do you mean the file extension should only reflect the file format and not the codecs it has inside ? Maybe that’s what we did in the past and it was a bad idea. It’d be useful to know if you can read the file by looking only at its extension
> It’d be useful to know if you can read the file by looking only at its extension
That would be madness, and there's already a workaround - the filename itself.
For most people, all that matters is an MKV file is a video file, and your configured player for this format is VLC. Only in a small number of cases does it matter about an "inner" format, or choice of parameter - e.g. for videos, what video codec or audio codec is in use, what the bitrate is, what the frame dimensions are.
For where it _matters_, people write "inner" file formats in the filename, e.g. "Gone With The Wind (1939) 1080p BluRay x265 HEVC FLAC GOONiES.mkv", to let prospective downloaders choose what to download from many competing encodings of exactly the same media, on websites where a filename is the _only_ place to write that metadata (if it were a website not standardised around making files available and searching only by filenames, it could just write it in the link description and filename wouldn't matter at all)
Most people don't care, for example, that their Word document is A4 landscape, so much that they need to know _in the filename_.
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).
So it seems like they checked that all their ideas could be implemented efficiently in hardware as they went along, with advice from real hardware producers.
Hopefully AV2-capable hardware will appear much quicker than AV1-capable hardware did.