Comments on: H.265 is Now Officially Approved, is 4K Streaming and Broadcast Just Around the Corner?

By: Rigman

Rigman — Tue, 21 May 2013 22:54:22 +0000

Typo, i mean 9 years obviously…and I would be careful with kurtzveil stuff generally, even thought that article is quite reasonable, its full of his tranhumanistic tendencies, singularity and stuff, IMO futuristic slavery…im going to make movie about what i mean, hopefully sooner then singularity itself :)

By: Rigman

Rigman — Tue, 21 May 2013 22:42:38 +0000

H.265/HEVC was in development from 2004 to this day(thats 8 years btw) by joint collaboration of experts from whole world which designed all previous generations of video codecs, yet another year or more of development is needed to adopt it for hardware. Also thay actually “only” added new features to h.264 which was their base.
I really doubt somebody can make something, what kills HEVC in next 5 years :)

By: At a Loss with Video Compression? Here Are Some Encoding Basics and Artifact Removal Tutorials - NoFilmSchool

Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:05:00 +0000

[...] H.265 has been approved as the next-gen lossy delivery codec, we’re still watching a vast amount of video in H.264. [...]

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 23:39:20 +0000

Who cares if it’s UltraHD rez. on paper if it’s compressed all to hell and still only 8 bit? I’d rather use the efficiency to add 10 bit, 4:2:2 and even greater bit depths to the UHD specs. even if it means raising the bitrates a bit higher than what they are advertising to eliminate visible compression artifacts.

Let’s face reality… something the content providers don’t seem to be able to do… our ancient ARPANET infrastructure can’t even handle single digital “1080p” without buffering or lag (with no lossless audio). It will still take decades more to allow for quality, on-demand UHD video services to be a realized. There still needs to be an interim disc based medium. Maybe a higher capacity Blu-ray? They’re already a reality.

But, we all know it was never about quality, and all about PPV services and that’s why the studios want streaming rather than a physical medium. DIVX, anyone?

And you still want to have cameras with intermediate grade codecs, not this MPEG stuff. That’s fine for consumer content delivery after the fact.

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 23:38:24 +0000

But, we all know it was never about quality, and all about PPV services and that’s why the studios want streaming rather than a physical medium. DIVX, anyone?

And you still want to have cameras with intermediate grade codecs, not this MPEG stuff. That’s fine for consumer content delivery after the fact.

By: Dheep'

Dheep' — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 22:24:54 +0000

Will the wonders of mankind never cease? Just as MP3 proliferation has destroyed anybody under 40′s ability to know what music really sounds like, is it going to, (after destroying film for profit) to pushing even WORSE video through ancient pipes?
I know you are all slavering with anticipation of billions hooked into the Subscription Pipeline. How do you figure thats going to work? I can see the Glimmers of the plan with this idea. Who cares what it looks like ,when everyone has forgotten that it used to actually Look and Sound good. How many more times are you going to be able to push HD and BluRay scams? ( Selling the SAME thing Over & OVER).

By: George

George — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 21:27:10 +0000

It seems like this codec’s strengths reside more in its potential for display/distribution than actually as a compression scheme to film to. Anything highly compressed, no matter how efficiently, will be lackluster compared to something captured with all the raw data and flexibility preserved for post, and output to H.265 once you’ve gotten the most out of the image. I’m speaking more in terms of narrative filmmaking, docs and live events could certainly still benefit, I imagine.

By: Sid

Sid — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:09:57 +0000

What the inherent problem is slow internet speeds. Until ISPs step up and significantly bump up base speeds for all users without charge, 4k and all this fancy new technology will be useless. My ISP only gives me 3.5mb/*s and this is supposed to be high speed.

By: H.265 is Now Officially Approved, is 4K Streaming and Broadcast Just Around the Corner? - NoFilmSchool | C500 | Scoop.it

Wed, 30 Jan 2013 04:22:24 +0000

[...] Technology's progression sometimes moves with consistent momentum, and sometime comes in spurts. [...]

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:55:11 +0000

I wonder how well it will edit. Will we need to transcode the footage to ProRes, like I do with h.264 footage to use in FCP 7, but do not do on Premiere 6.0?

Also, it will be nice to get twice as much footage on a 32Gig card, or finally be able to watch an HD movie on Vimeo or Youtube without frequent lag.

By: Shenan

Shenan — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:32:59 +0000

I forgot to add that this also probably means that most h.264 based cameras won’t have the processing power to implement h.265 as a firmware update. Besides, why would the camera companies want to do that anyway? They’d much rather sell you new cameras.

By: Shenan

Shenan — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:31:28 +0000

Folks, before you get too excited about this, remember the jump in CPU power that was required with the change from mpeg2 to mpeg4 (h.264). H.265 will probably require another large jump. Custom hardware on mobile devices for decoding/playback is one thing, but decoding and encoding on a general purpose PC will be something else. There are still computers, software, and users out there struggling with h.264. Now the requirements are going to get even higher.

By: Neil

Neil — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:18:48 +0000

Dude… H.266. My grand kids are gonna stream the HELL out of some video, playboys

By: Michael Markham

Michael Markham — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 19:26:45 +0000

Yes but if we are talking about putting this in the next generation of low cost cameras (DSLR, FS100, C100 Territory) the question to me is: How does it grade?

By: Natt

Natt — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:07:17 +0000

I bet content-providers will LOVE the .red format. Try to pirate that, it won’t even play back at the PC!

By: Álex Montoya

Álex Montoya — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:04:50 +0000

Well, I’m going to buy a 2,5K monitor in less than two months. Anyway, I thought we were talking about H.265.

I certainly can’t predict the future (as can’t they) but I’d be surprised if H.265 is of any relevance by 2017.

By: Damon

Damon — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 17:40:14 +0000

Agreed. Technological progress is one thing. But the marketplace is another. It is very possible for the tech to far outpace the growth of the market and if companies get too far out ahead of their customers they could be left holding the bag.

By: Damon

Damon — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 17:37:00 +0000

I don’t have to intuitively predict technological curves. I can look at my wallet. My HD tv cost a lot of money and I was only able to afford it when HD was so widely adopted that the prices came down drastically. Even then, a significant portion of the population is still in SD. So I can tell you right now that it makes no difference how rapidly 4K gets adopted by others. Millions of people like me will be quite content with the HD sets we’ve already got instead of tossing them in favor of yet another super expensive set.

By: Crews Control

Crews Control — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:48:59 +0000

Hey Folks! I don't know about you but I am excited for H.265 to get get here I can't wait. So I recently wrote an article about the early adopters of UltraHD and received varied responses of like and dislike. But overall I think some people are not excited about upgrading their technology again, while others are eager for the next evolution. I am curious to see how this codec measures up with XAVC and/or AVC Ultra for that matter.

By: alex

alex — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:40:58 +0000

it’s tradition at this point, I’d be really disappointed if it didn’t happen haha