Opinions on the H.264 Codec

[TK5005]

I was curious to get anyone's opinion on the Quicktime H.264 Codec. I would like to hear about your results (good and bad.) I'm experimenting with different forms of media distribution using this codec.

Any opinions would be appriciated,

TK5005

[mhar4]

Looks fantastic, but takes so long to encode is hardly worth it.

[AntnyMD]

Yes, it looks excellent. I've only seen one clip from Apple, around the day Quicktime 7 was finally released. It looked better than standard television to me. I tried my own encoding experiments but (a) it really does take forever and a day to encode anything, and (b) I was obviously not using the settings correctly because my test outputs were gargantuan compared to the DVDs I was using (Criterion Collection for their high bitrates and quality mastering).

I fall in the 'hardly worth it' camp, except if an inexpensive hardware encoder were released, this would be a killer codec.

[willrob]

How are folks using this codec? I mean for what destination. It produces great looking clips, but you can't put them on a DVD without re-encoding as MPEG. Perhaps for web sites?

[ozymango]

How are folks using this codec? I mean for what destination. It produces great looking clips, but you can't put them on a DVD without re-encoding as MPEG. Perhaps for web sites?

I've played around with this mostly just to play with it, you know how that goes. But I'm guessing we're still on the leading edge here, in that this may (or will) be the "replacement" for mpeg2 (especially for HD discs) but right now that's exactly the question for your average use -- what the heck do I do with this right now?

Me, I've been thinking of using it for archiving some of my DV (tape) video sources -- I keep the tapes for master backups, but would love to have the best video compression quality I can for secondary backups, ya know, for later editing where an uncompressed AVI file is too big but an mpeg2 is too compressed (in terms of visual quality). But I haven't done much experimenting here and I don't know how easy it is to edit h264 files natively at the current time; I'm sure there'll be much more support soon, and hopefully affordable for your average cheapskate (like me!)

[TK5005]

I agree, it does take a while to encode, but it works great in conjunction with compressor. You can harness the power of multiple G5's to get the video encoded faster. As to the question on what it can be used for, I've found it great to encode high quality HD video for PDAs with an unbelievably low file size. Works great for the web too. My encoding experiments have been with movie trailers ripped from DVD.

When Blue Ray is released I'm sure we will see its true potential.

-TK5005

[edDV]

How are folks using this codec? I mean for what destination. It produces great looking clips, but you can't put them on a DVD without re-encoding as MPEG. Perhaps for web sites?

I've played around with this mostly just to play with it, you know how that goes. But I'm guessing we're still on the leading edge here, in that this may (or will) be the "replacement" for mpeg2 (especially for HD discs) but right now that's exactly the question for your average use -- what the heck do I do with this right now?

Me, I've been thinking of using it for archiving some of my DV (tape) video sources -- I keep the tapes for master backups, but would love to have the best video compression quality I can for secondary backups, ya know, for later editing where an uncompressed AVI file is too big but an mpeg2 is too compressed (in terms of visual quality). But I haven't done much experimenting here and I don't know how easy it is to edit h264 files natively at the current time; I'm sure there'll be much more support soon, and hopefully affordable for your average cheapskate (like me!)

Good Idea for DV view files but future editing as you say is untested for true backup use.

I've been experimenting with h.264 as a way to shrink my HDTV MPeg2 ts streams to current DVDR. Currently transcoding takes many hours per hour of material.

Playback currently is from my computer (not a MAC) to an external HDTV display. HD MPeg2 ts stream capture takes minimal CPU. A hardware ts to h.264 encoder would be killer for PVR application.

[AntnyMD]

As to the question on what it can be used for, I've found it great to encode high quality HD video for PDAs with an unbelievably low file size.

Share some settings!

[DanSlagle]

When I get my dual 3 Ghz it will be the only codec I use :P

[edDV]

When I get my dual 3 Ghz it will be the only codec I use :P

Then you might get it to render overnight if you sleep late.

[thoughton]

As to the question on what it can be used for, I've found it great to encode high quality HD video for PDAs with an unbelievably low file size.

Share some settings!

Also please share which PDAs can play H264.

[TK5005]

Sorry For the confusion. I have not actually found a PDA that will play H.264. I was talking theory about how low the file size was. Once the codec catches on I'm sure there will the the hardware to play it. I was able to get a low file size of 50mb and good video by compressing at around 10 megabits per second on compressor. I also added a noise reduction filter to smooth some rough edges. If you are going to play the video on a small screen you can usually compress between 4 and 5 Mb/s. The compression time took 1 hour and 30 min on my dual 2.7 Ghz with 1.5 gigs of ram. If you are able to use compressor with multiple computers it can take half the time. (But then again, who has access to multiple G5s.)

[thoughton]

I think there's a typo in your numbers. When I encode xvid video for a (approx) QVGA smartphone I get good results at around 120Kb/s. H264 should be lower than that. The figures you are suggesting (4,5,10 Mb/s) are more like DVD bitrates.

[TK5005]

There was a typo. there was supposed to be a point in front of 4 and 5. .4 and .5 mb/s were the only ones I've tried besides 10 mb/s. It seemed to come out ok in compressor. I haven't tried anything lower. I'm still learning compression techniqes and terminology so my explanations are a bit sketchy.

[thoughton]

Those sizes don't sound too bad. xvid at 120kbps is good, but not even close to perfect. I'd settle for 400-500kbps for a perfect picture All I need now is a H264 decoder for a 67MHz ARM-9 processor :P

[DanSlagle]

When I get my dual 3 Ghz it will be the only codec I use :P

Then you might get it to render overnight if you sleep late.

LOL yeah but the week long encode it takes now with my 533 Mhz G4, an over nighter will seem F-A-S-T

[baturjan]

I'm stoked by it. I can now send a lot longer home video clips of our daughter to her grandparents. It does take a while to encode and I have a G5 2GHz. My next upgrade is to increase the RAM from 1.5GB to 5.5GB. Although, I don't know if that will help for this.

Regarding watching H.264 on PDAs, I watch some home video (MPEG2 files encoded to H.264) on my Tungsten T3 with a freeware called, "The Core Pocket Media Player". It plays great. Of course, I have nothing to compare it to since this is the first time I have ever played video on my PDA.

[edDV]

More RAM won't significantly improve h.264 encode times. It's all about raw CPU power.

This shouldn't be a problem with future computers and hardware codecs.

[WiseWeasel]

Until they come out with ultra rez...

I think H.264 is the best thing since sliced bread. It's all about the quality/compression, encode times are not important to me, though they're highly acceptable on my 2x2GHz G5. I do QT Movie to MPEG-4 export, select H.264 as the video codec, AAC as the audio, and do a multi-pass encode, full VGA resolution, 900 kbits/sec, 30 fps, key frame every 24 frames, and it looks great.

[karipu]

But can you watch H.264 encoded movies with the standalone desktop DivX player??

[mhar4]

Forum members may already have noticed, but the newest version of ffmpegX implements a compliant H.264 within an mp4 container. Looks fantastic, but best of all encodes orders-of-magnitude faster than the Quicktime version.

[sdsumike619]

is this a good format for viewing video on the web? I'm using Vegas 5, not sure how to set the settings for this H.264 format..

[edDV]

is this a good format for viewing video on the web? I'm using Vegas 5, not sure how to set the settings for this H.264 format..

Web?
For HD, you will author at 720p or 1080i. Then encode H.264. Web connections would need to handle 6-8Mb/s realtime sustained. A realtime hardware decoder would probably be needed until CPU speed catches up.

480i or 480p may compress to 2-4Mb/s. Realtime playback may also require a hardware decoder on a compatable graphics card or HD DVD player.

[Thomas-MacFreak]

Apple has written a tutorial: Creating Amazing Video Content with H.264

I exported video from Final Cut Express using QuickTime conversion. I used these settings, based on the LAN/Intranet preset, for a 30 minute clip:

Video
Compression: H.264
Quality: High
Frame rate: 25
Key frame rate: 125
(25*5 as I learned from Lynda - Learning FCP 4, and now from the Apple H.264 tutorial)
Bitrate: 1372 kbit/sec (default)
Frame reordering: yes
Encoding mode: multi-pass
Size: 640x352

Sound
Format: MPEG-4 Audio (AAC)
Sample rate: 48 kHz
Sample size: 16
Channels: 2
Options:
Compressor: AAC (Low Complexity)
Target Output: Specified Bit Rate
Bit Rate: 128 kbits/second
Output Sample Rate: 44.100 kHz
Encoder Quality: Better

Computer Details/Setup
Operating System: Mac OS 10.4.2
CPU Speed: Dual 2.5GHz G5
RAM: 2GB

Result
Encoding duration: 3 hours
File size: 337,3MB
Quality: Very good indeed
Other: I wish I had a render/encoding farm!