Good news for Sony : Digigami MPEG-2 Encoder destroy h.264

Will this make sony wins the next gen optical wars ?

http://www.digigami.com/press/pr/pr.php?PR=2005-12-22.pr.html&PR_YEAR=ALL

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Digigami VBR HD MPEG-2 Encoder Keeping Pace with H.264

Long Beach, CA - December 22, 2005 · Digigami today announced its new MegaPEG HDTV VBR MPEG-2 encoder is capable of matching and, in some cases, exceeding the picture quality while at the same time offering reduced bitrates compared to current H.264 encoders.

Recently, Sony Pictures senior VP of advanced technologies, Don Ecklund, was blasted for his assertions about MPEG-2 video quality in defense of Sony's decision to release HD MPEG-2 encoded feature films on Blu-Ray discs. Digigami's own research and actual MPEG encoder output (HD MPEG-2 sample movies) verify Ecklund's claims that MPEG-2 can and will achieve quality/bitrates comparable to H.264 for the next generation of optical disc formats.

"By and large, both viewers and media companies are primarily concerned with the quality of HD-encoding of feature films. " remarked Gen Kiyooka, CTO of Digigami. "Most modern television content is shot in 35mm 24p, and so is technically quite similar to feature films."
New Advances in MPEG-2 VBR Encoding squeeze Hi-Def MPEG-2 on standard DVD

Proponents claim H.264 it is capable of HD encoding feature films at the same bitrates as standard definition DVD. To the extent that this is true, the capability is not unique to H.264. The new Digigami HD encoder can produce 720p content with an average bitrate of 3-7 mbit/s, which is equivalent to the bitrates used in today's standard definition DVD titles. Comparing with H.264 we can see there is no advantage; an improved MPEG-2 encoder can perform this feat as well. Score one for MPEG-2.

"In our tests here at Digigami, we find that our MPEG-2 encoder is actually outperforming H.264 by a wide margin on 720p/1080p film content. Typically, our HD MPEG-2 encoder can produce VBR files two thirds to one half the bitrate produced by current H.264 encoders. On our website we have compressed material which supports this assertion. A recent example is a 400MB H.264 720p video blog that we recompressed to 172MB MPEG-1 VBR. In our testing, only highly saturated, brightly colored material (atypical of most content) is improved by H.264 - owing primarily to the use of 4:2:2 color. It amuses us that our MPEG-1 VBR encoder can also match and outperform H.264 on many progressive encoding tasks at HD frame sizes. MPEG-1 is 6 years older than MPEG-2 and even more widely adopted, reliable, proven and trustworthy."
Improves Widely Used MPEG-2 Rather Than Hopping H.264 Bandwagon

Digigami took a different approach to improving their video encoder technology. Firstly, the company built a powerful MPEG video picture quality analysis (PQA) tool which allows employees and customers to quantitatively analyze any existing compressed MPEG-2 footage. The compression results of different encoders, including H.264 encoders, can be compared quantitatively. Secondly, Digigami used these tools to analyze a large number of commercial DVD titles encoded by different encoders and mastering houses. Based on the findings, they made improvements to the company's core MPEG-2 encoder which eliminates inefficiencies of previous generation encoders - the same goal as H.264. However, these improvements require no changes to the MPEG-2 HD televisions, which is the reason for having an ISO standard in the first place.
Increased Bitrate Headroom of Blu-Ray Optical Discs Boon to MPEG-2

"The first thing you notice when analyzing compressed feature films is that MPEG-2 is already doing a great job of squeezing this material down. In most feature films, long segments of dialog provide for very efficient and easy file size reduction. It is not clear that H.264 is going to make these very low bitrate sequences any smaller. Instead, we find that the difficulty with standard definition DVD is the bitrate ceiling of 9.8 mbit/s, which is the primary constraint when trying to compress challenging material. With the vastly increased bitrate headroom of 54 mbits/s afforded by Blu-Ray (compared to 25 mbits/s CBR for ATSC HDTV), our MPEG-2 encoder has no trouble encoding high-complexity/high-motion passages, and, at the same time, in easy sections it is clear that we are running circles around H.264. We have re-encoded a wide variety of HD material currently available in H.264 and in only one case were not able to reduce the bitrate by 30-40%. So there is no question that MPEG-2 at 54 mbits/s is capable of accurately representing HD feature film content with stunning quality."

"Saying that MPEG-2 is incapable of competitive VBR HD encoding is like saying that twisted pair ethernet will never go above 10 mbits/s. In 1991, if you would have advocated use of twisted-pair ethernet at speeds of 1 gigabit, people would have thought you were insane."

Pricing and Availability
The Digigami MegaPEG HDTV VBR MPEG-2 encoder is currently shipping and is available for Mac OS X, and runs on most modern Apple hardware. The price is $995.00, which includes everything you need for multi-pass interactive VBR encoding of feature film content. Digigami technical support provides assistance in achieving superior quality and file sizes with both HD and SD encoding.

About Digigami...
Digigami is a privately held company headquartered in the greater Los Angeles area. Digigami was founded in 1994 and released its first MPEG-1/MPEG-2 encoder, MegaPEG, in 1996 along with an early Netscape plug-in that plays streaming video in MPEG, AVI, QuickTime formats. For the past 10 years, Digigami has been continuously improving its MPEG video compression technology; MPressionist HDTV, MegaPEG HDTV and MoviesForMyPod are the most recent Digigami products.

For details and pricing information on all Digigami products, please visit our Web site at http://www.digigami.com/.
 
supervegeta said:
Long Beach, CA - December 22, 2005 · Digigami today announced its new MegaPEG HDTV VBR MPEG-2 encoder is capable of matching and, in some cases, exceeding the picture quality while at the same time offering reduced bitrates compared to current H.264 encoders.
Unless they can clarify which H.264 encoder they used for the test it's meaningless...

I think the reason why they use MPEG2 for a while is Intel Cores and Athlons can't decode 1080p H.264 VBR streams without major hiccups.
 
I'm not disputing any of it, but the article itself is not impartial. It's all "What we at digigami have to say on the matter."
 
A guy from digigami came to doom9 forums with these same claims and it turned it out he didn't really know anything about H.264.
 
It's not that BluRay does not support H.246. It's simply an issue of not wanting to play the licencing fees. H.246 licencing has content-based fee system meaning every movie they release encoded in H.246 they will have to pay a fee in the millions of dollars for.

This is the only reason Sony and studio friends are going to push Mpeg2 as long as possible.
 
I don't understand wtf the big deal is over these encoder wars. It's just another thing for fanpeople to fight over, that has no relevance in the real world.

So what if sony uses MPEG1 with 400mbit/s bitrate to encode HD motion pictures if one can still fit a movie + sound and all that other shit on a BR disc. WHO CARES!

This is a complete non-issue, and not console related.
 
I would think that the BDA would want to steer clear of people decreasing HD file sizes and saying that it can fit on a standard DVD, it would seem to undermine the reasoning for switching to either of the competing formats, and we know the movie industry would prefer not to switch.
 
Hardknock said:
No

oh wait.... but s.o.ny doesn't own Bluray, its an association of MANY companies, ergo, after this sudden discovery of my own, i can say with ease that this mpeg2 can indeed make bluray win even more advantage because it does't relate directly to S.O.NY, so i can still go to bed with my x360 and freely navigate on teamxbox with a clear mind because after all, BDA camp is not S.ON.Y, so i can say: "....maybe its gonna do good to Buraly ups, its b.l.u.r.a.y, hard to write this name down!!..." and at the same time not saying anything good about s.on.y (knocking wood two times!)

i feel better already... i might just as well buy ps3 because after all, a good gamer can own all consoles and not only the one my friends like! but i would have to cancel my teamxbox account because my credibitly would go down down down, and i love how they make me feel manly when in the same sentence i put the name S.O.N.Y between many bad ugly words

fixed mate....

/sarcasm

saying just "no" its what ppl do at f.an.boy forums. Dont do it here man, you cant turn ppl minds in here as you do at teamxbox with just "no's"
at least present some explanation (hell, make one up) :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a pile of crap, imo. If they really have an Mpeg 2 encoder that can match current (good) H.264 codecs I will be flabbergasted, but even if they do Mpeg 2 can never be as good as H.264 could be. The tech is 2 generations ahead.
 
inefficient said:
It's not that BluRay does not support H.246. It's simply an issue of not wanting to play the licencing fees. H.246 licencing has content-based fee system meaning every movie they release encoded in H.246 they will have to pay a fee in the millions of dollars for.

Do you have a link, or are you pulling those royalty numbers from your ass (as I suspect).
 
Those numbers are for encoding/decoding hardware aren't they? Not for media.

<edit> ya they are, here's the media stuff

Title-by-Title – For AVC video (either on physical media or ordered and paid for on title-by-title basis, e.g., PPV, VOD, or digital download, where viewer determines titles to be viewed or number of viewable titles are otherwise limited), there are no royalties up to 12 minutes in length. For AVC video greater than 12 minutes in length, royalties are the lower of (a) 2% of the price paid to the licensee from licensee’s first arms length sale or (b) $0.02 per title. Categories of licensees include (i) replicators of physical media, and (ii) service/content providers (e.g., cable, satellite, video DSL, internet and mobile) of VOD, PPV and electronic downloads to end users.

$0.02 per, max.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dskneo said:
fixed mate....

/sarcasm

saying just "no" its what ppl do at f.an.boy forums. Dont do it here man, you cant turn ppl minds in here as you do at teamxbox with just "no's"
at least present some explanation (hell, make one up) :D

I can't believe you took the time to type all of that gibberish out. You honestly expect a codec to guarantee a win in the format war??? That is what the question asked, and I merely gave an honest and direct answer. Nothing is guaranteed. I thought my answer was self-explanatory.
 
NucNavST3 said:
I would think that the BDA would want to steer clear of people decreasing HD file sizes and saying that it can fit on a standard DVD, it would seem to undermine the reasoning for switching to either of the competing formats, and we know the movie industry would prefer not to switch.

Exactly. Which is why I never understood the war between h.264 and mpeg2.
 
Guden Oden said:
So what if sony uses MPEG1 with 400mbit/s bitrate to encode HD motion pictures if one can still fit a movie + sound and all that other shit on a BR disc. WHO CARES!


Well that would mean only an hour of video at most could fit on a BR disc, which isn't long enough for most movies!
 
NucNavST3 said:
I would think that the BDA would want to steer clear of people decreasing HD file sizes and saying that it can fit on a standard DVD, it would seem to undermine the reasoning for switching to either of the competing formats, and we know the movie industry would prefer not to switch.
I think you are ignoring the other benefits of "next-gen" home video playback. It's not just about resolution, although moving from SD to HD will be a good step up for quality and marketing (expect marketing to focus on this aspect). The DVD spec is not just about MPEG-2, it's about all the media on the disc and how the disc is structured. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD will offer other features beyond increased resolutions that will improve products. Likewise, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD have other components than just the "exciting" H.264 codec and lossless audio. I think the Microsoft demo at E3 showed this quite well.

Expect interactivity options to increase and there is more room for bonuses. Even if the highest possible bitrates are not used for the movies themselves, you may get conveniences like main presentation and bonus feature on one disc. Another possibility is "box sets" like Band of Brothers on a single disc. Using XML and increasing connectivity would imply that even more data would be accessible from off-disc sources to complement what you are watching. Perhaps we can think of this as some form of mini-IMDB.com pertaining to the disc you are watching. The one thing I am a bit stumped on is that I haven't read that either format mandates internet connectivity for the devices. Making such a feature standard should be of primary importance IMO. Then it's a matter of whether people hook up or not, but I really think it should be there (maybe it is, but I haven't seen anything about that).

BTW, I am often confused why people cite higher costs for Blu-Ray as a mjor negative. Sure, the factories will have to re-tool, but didn't they do this already when moving from CD to DVD? Why should we, as consumers, worry about this aspect? Let them pay a little to reap their rewards. If you presented "DVD quality" movies on a Blu-Ray disc you could fit in much more content, elminating the need for multiple discs. This may not seem like much savings, but this also carries over to the shipping box (reduced size) and should be a win-win. However, the fact that you pay the same price for a DVD movie including a second "bonus" DVD as you would for a single disc should tell you that the discs themselves are not the main cost component.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Belmontvedere said:
Well that would mean only an hour of video at most could fit on a BR disc, which isn't long enough for most movies!
*WOOSH*
You completely missed the point man, and instead got your limited mind caught up on a technicality.

What I was saying is, if it all looks the same, and fits on a disc, who in their right mind would care even if the movie was encoded using recycled toilet paper?
 
Back
Top