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

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

videocardz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 227 posts

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

#91

Post by lxgr »

amiga386 wrote: post #40
lxgr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

Hopefully that improves. The guy giving the presentation on AV2 made clear there was "rigorous scrutiny for hardware decoding complexity", and they were advised by Realtek and AMD on this. 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…

Oh, I don't doubt that it'll be hardware implementable, but it's a shame that current hardware is usually mostly out of luck with new codecs. (Sometimes parts can be reused in more programmable/compartmentalized decoding pipelines, but I haven't seen that often.)

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

#92

Post by dogma1138 »

nickthegreek wrote: post #76
alberth wrote: 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…

for the super affluent, https://www.kaleidescape.com/compare/

This has been more or less proven to be a complete scam, the quality isn’t any better than Blu-ray and in many cases worse.

The “best” quality of streaming you have is Sony Core https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Pictures_Core but it has a rather limited library.

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

#93

Post by whycome »

JimDabell wrote: post #71
whycome wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not absurd to think that you could send a model of your voice to a receiving party and then have your audio call just essentially be encoded text that gets thrown through the voice generator on the local machine. AI video could mean that essential elements are preserved (actors?) but other elements are generated locally. Hell, digital doubles for actors could also mean only their movements are transmitted. Essen…

Yeah, I brought that up here and got some interesting responses: > It would be interesting to see how far you could get using deepfakes as a method for video call compression. > Train a model locally ahead of time and upload it to a server, then whenever you have a call scheduled the model is downloaded in advance by the other participants. > Now, instead of having to send video data, you only have to send a represen…

In the future, our phone contacts will store name, address, phone number, voice model. (The messed up part will be that the user doesn’t necessarily send their model, but the model could be crafted from previous calls)

You could probably also transmit a low res grayscale version of the video to “map” any local reproduction to. Kinda like how a low resolution image could be reasonably reproduced if an artist knew who the subject was.

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

#95

Post by TheJoeMan »

alberth wrote: 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…

I’m still so surprised Disney+ degrades their content/streaming service so much. Of all the main services I’ve tried (Netflix, Prime, Hulu, HBO) Disney+ has some of the worst over-compression, lip-sync, and remembering-which-episode-is-next issues for me. Takes away from the “magic”.

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

#96

Post by tliltocatl »

alberth wrote: 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…

Economically speaking, it doesn't make any sense for them to spend more on bandwidth and storage if they can get away with not spending more.

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

#97

Post by thunderfork »

alberth wrote: 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…

[dead]

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

#98

Post by ttoinou »

galad87 wrote: post #18
ttoinou wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 wouldn't scale well, something like .av1opusflacwebvtt?

Video codec is the most important though !

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

#99

Post by strogonoff »

alberth wrote: 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…

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 denoising[1]. Noise is random and therefore difficult to compress while preserving its pleasing appearance, so they really like the idea of serving everything denoised as much as possible. (The catch, of course, is that removing noise from live camera footage generally implies compromising the very fine details captured by the camera as a side effect.)

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44456779

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45022184

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

#100

Post by toofy »

amiga386 wrote: post #80
cogman10 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You especially notice the compression on gradients and in dark movie scenes. That's not a correctly calibrated TV. The contrast is tuned WAY up. People do that to see what's going on in the dark, but you aren't meant to really be able to see those colors. That's why it's a big dark blob. It's supposed to be barely visible on a well calibrated display. A lot of video codecs will erase details in dark scenes because…

> but you aren't meant to really be able to see those colors Someone needs to tell filmmakers. They shoot dark scenes because they can - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qehsk_-Bjq4 - and it ends up looking like shit after compression that assumes normal lighting levels.

> Someone needs to tell filmmakers. They shoot dark scenes because they can…

i disagree completely. i watch a movie for the filmmakers story, i don’t watch movies to marvel at compression algorithms.

it would be ridiculous to watch movies shot with only bright scenes because streaming service accountants won’t stop abusing compression to save some pennies.

> …ends up looking like shit after compression that assumes normal lighting levels.

it’s entirely normal to have dark scenes in movies. streaming services are failing if they’re using compression algorithms untuned to do dark scenes when soooo many movies and series are absolutely full of night shots.

Post reply on HN