Different Colors with Lossless codecs? How is it possible? please HELP!

[Stears555]

Hello guys!

The original camcorderfile is here (1920*1080 25 PSF PAL 24Mbit/s recorded with x.v. colour mode)

http://diktafon.atw.hu/00112.MTS (It's only 169 Mbyte)

The video is recorded in progressive segmented frame, therefore turn off your deinterlacer/autodeinterlacer in your player.

I transcoded them with lossless codecs (Huffyuv, FFV1 codec, and the Utvideo bt.709 (aka "ULH0") codecs) I used only 4:2:0 color spaces (YV12) in the trascode process. (the videos were simply transcoded with Adobe Premiere Pro CC, without any modifications)

Which are the more realistic&better? Aren't they lossless codecs?

[Stears555]

The photos: (the first is a huffyuv , the second is an ffv1, the third is an utvideo bt.709)
The Huffyuv and FFV1 looks similar/same. But the photo of UTI codecs' video looks different: Just look the colours of the roofs.


The Huffyuv

[Stears555]

The FFv1

[Stears555]

The Utvideo bt 709 codecs (ULH 0)

[Selur]

flipping, between the screenshots iof ffv1 and huffyuv in my browser I can't see any color differences at all.
Since I see no picture for ' Utvideo bt.709' I would guess that they use different color conversion methods bt.709 vs. bt.601 (edit: UT image is visible now)

[Stears555]

flipping, between the screenshots iof ffv1 and huffyuv in my browser I can't see any color differences at all.
Since I see no picture for ' Utvideo bt.709' I would guess that they use different color conversion methods bt.709 vs. bt.601 (edit: UT image is visible now)

During you read my first post, I posted the the utvideo photo. Did you download the video?

[Selur]

No, I did not download the video. (don't see a reason to download 'only' 169MB to only check some colors)

[Stears555]

No, I did not download the video. (don't see a reason to download 'only' 169MB to only check some colors)

The video was created from "environmentally friendly" bits and bytes, it is "recyclable". (you can delete this 1minute video after watching) Or do you have limited or too slow internet connection?

[Selur]

atm. I'm on a mobile connection, so yes my bandwith is rather limited until I arrive at home later today

[Stears555]

atm. I'm on a mobile connection, so yes my bandwith is rather limited until I arrive at home later today

I know the bad circumstances and situations of mobile internet in Germany ( I lived 4 moths in Hamburg 6 months in München and 2 months in Berlin in 2011) The internet infrastructure is not enough good. Forexample: the Mobil internets are not unlimited, the HSDPA coverage is not sufficient, the HSDPA II was developed too late, and the great cities had no hypernet (60 Mbit/s mobil net) There are very few free wifi stations in the cities. I couldn't understand how was it possible in Germany....

[jagabo]

When using lossless codecs you still have to be sure any YUV/RGB conversions in the chain are done correctly. HuffYUV and FFV1 have no way of indicating whether the YUV video is rec.601 or rec.709. So you can't count on software converting them to RGB correctly.

[sanlyn]

I transcoded them with lossless codecs (Huffyuv, FFV1 codec, and the Utvideo bt.709 (aka "ULH0") codecs) I used only 4:2:0 color spaces (YV12) in the trascode process.

I don 't think so. YV12 can't be used with huffyuv.

[Stears555]

When using lossless codecs you still have to be sure any YUV/RGB conversions in the chain are done correctly. HuffYUV and FFV1 have no way of indicating whether the YUV video is rec.601 or rec.709. So you can't count on software converting them to RGB correctly.

Dou you think that UT video (ULH0) bt709 codec was better?

[Stears555]

I transcoded them with lossless codecs (Huffyuv, FFV1 codec, and the Utvideo bt.709 (aka "ULH0") codecs) I used only 4:2:0 color spaces (YV12) in the trascode process.

I don 't think so. YV12 can't be used with huffyuv.

Than try FFDSHOW encoder, and you can use it!

[Selur]

btw. if you use ffmpeg directly you can use the colormatrix filter to set if 601 or 709 is used during RGB->YUV conversion,...

[Stears555]

btw. if you use ffmpeg directly you can use the colormatrix filter to set if 601 or 709 is used during RGB->YUV conversion,...

Do you have a screenshoot?

[sanlyn]

Yes. If you use the ffmpeg encoder. Most people don't use ffpmeg's version of huff. Every couple of years or so, ffmpeg's new version of huff will likely make older versions unplayable. Lagarith takes YV12, makes a slightly smaller file. and doesn't require ffmpeg.

[Stears555]

Yes. If you use the ffmpeg encoder. Most people don't use ffpmeg's version of huff. Lagarith takes YV12 and makes a slightly smaller file.

FFV1 is better compressor than lagarith. The compression ratio of the ffmpeg huffyuv YV12 with adaptive huffman tables are not much worse than Lagarith

[Selur]

@sanlyn: I doubt that ffmpeg/libav will remove their huffyuv en- and decoder anytime soon, so as long as libav is around a de- and encoder for huffyuv should be available,... (and it is already for a few years)

Do you have a screenshoot?

-vf colormatrix=... (see: http://www.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg-filters.html#colormatrix) explains the available parameters.

[Stears555]

My compression results:

Huffyuv: 2,06 GByte
UTvideo: 2,03 GByte
Lagarith: 1,97Gbyte
FFV1: 1,83 Gbyte

Uncompressed YV12: 4,28 GByte

[sanlyn]

@sanlyn: I doubt that ffmpeg/libav will remove their huffyuv en- and decoder anytime soon, so as long as libav is around a de- and encoder for huffyuv should be available,... (and it is already for a few years)

Do you have a screenshoot?

-vf colormatrix=... (see: http://www.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg-filters.html#colormatrix) explains the available parameters.

Oh, my. The next time someone suggests that I often recommend processing video the hard way, I'll refer to this post.

[poisondeathray]

What jagabo said above is important. When you look at a PNG screenshot it's RGB, not YV12. If the software you're using doesn't do the conversion properly it will look incorrect

When done properly, all 3 should be the same . I've tested this before.

It's possible Adobe be doing something wrong (the "handshake" between adobe to the encoder might be a problem) , or it's possible your screenshot software is wrong .

If you want to find out what the problem is - upload a tiny clip of each 3 , ulh0, lags, ffv1 (only need 1 frame , really) we can check

[jagabo]

Dou you think that UT video (ULH0) bt709 codec was better?

Assuming your video was rec.709 (it wasn't flagged) the UT snapshot was closest to correct.

By the way, even if a video has properly flagged the colorspace you can't assume software will handle it correctly. You should always verify the software is doing what it's supposed to do.

[Stears555]

What jagabo said above is important. When you look at a PNG screenshot it's RGB, not YV12. If the software you're using doesn't do the conversion properly it will look incorrect

When done properly, all 3 should be the same . I've tested this before.

It's possible Adobe be doing something wrong (the "handshake" between adobe to the encoder might be a problem) , or it's possible your screenshot software is wrong .

If you want to find out what the problem is - upload a tiny clip of each 3 , ulh0, lags, ffv1 (only need 1 frame , really) we can check

Here are the files (all files are around only 10 Mbyte)

http://diktafon.atw.hu/huffyuv.avi
http://diktafon.atw.hu/lagarit.avi
http://diktafon.atw.hu/ffv1.avi
http://diktafon.atw.hu/utvideo.avi

[jagabo]

utvideo.avi has the same rec.709 colors as the original MTS file. lagarit.avi has rec.601 colors.

[Stears555]

utvideo.avi has the same rec.709 colors as the original MTS file. lagarit.avi has rec.601 colors.

And the FFV1 & Huffy videos?

[jagabo]

ffv1 and huffyuv have rec.601 colors.

[Stears555]

Which is the best codec for live HDMI==>Expresscard recording for a laptop? IS UTvideo the best due its bt.709 capabilty?

[Cornucopia]

This is a longshot, but it could be that whatever you used (ffmpeg?) to convert may also have trouble working with the x.v color coding.

Scott

[jagabo]

Which is the best codec for live HDMI==>Expresscard recording for a laptop? IS UTvideo the best due its bt.709 capabilty?

It's not really a matter of which is better. More a matter of using them correctly. But given your current workflow (used to make the images in your earlier posts) UT is working better for you.