Video: 2019 What did I miss? Comparing AV1, VP9, HEVC, & H.264

The ever popular, always analytical Jan Ozers spends time here evaluating the quality of these codecs against the ever-present h.264. As the team here at The Broadcast Knowledge takes a short break, we’re recapping the most popular posts of the year. Interestingly, this post is from over a year ago but is still seeing top-10 traffic. This is no surprise since, as I said in my interview with SMPTE on the subject of codecs, everyone touches codecs in some way even if only at home. So it’s no surprise there is such an interest.

Jan takes a careful approach to explaining the penetration adn abilities of h.264 in order to see at what point we can break even and start to ebenefit from using alternative codecs. He then takes each codec in turn looking at it its pros and cons to paint a picture of the options available for those willing and able to go beyond h.264.

Read the original article or Watch now!
Speakers

Jan Ozer Jan Ozer
Industry Analyst
Streaming Learning Center

Video: 2019 What did I miss? – SRT

We’re looking at the most popular posts of 2019 now as The Broadcast Knowledge takes a break over the holiday season. Twitch’s Alex Converse had one of the most visited posts of the year in his video detailing how SRT works. It’s a great technical resource for developers and engineers wanting to understand more than just the highlights of SRT. Did it do well because it was Alex? Because the San Francisco’s Video Tech meet up is a well known part of Demuxed’s community for ‘engineers working with video’ or because its title? Any or all of these could be true and it wouldn’t invalidate it’s usefulness or its popularity. So if you haven’t already, read more about it here, or click play below.

Another SRT talk of interest this year you may want to catch up on was the IBC SRT Open Source Technical panel which looked at the general SRT features and looked at the pros and cons against SRT. The panel looked at a case study with Red Bee Media and South American broadcaster Globo and the use of RTP and SRT together. Read more detail here or click here to watch for free

Speaker

Alex Converse Alex Converse
Streaming Video Software Engineer,
Twitch

Video: Panel Discussion: Hardware is Dead!?

The broadcast industry is still producing many new hardware-based products with FPGAs and encoding ASICs still ruling the roost for many companies when it comes to fitting video products into small, power efficient spaces. But the battle continues as software-based products continue to ramp up, server-based products continue to improve and the need to be able to virtualise or place functions into the cloud drives the desire for software-based solutions.

We all know that hardware isn’t dead and that the interest of the topic is where we are today, what is possible and why people are choosing this route and that’s what Broadcast Solutions’ panel discusses in this video. Often called COTS – commercial off-the shelf – hardware, the idea is that you can buy the same server that any other industry does and run your broadcast-related functions on it. When it’s in the cloud, you’re not even selecting the hardware as much as saying how many CPUs and other resources you’d like.

The first comments made come from Marcel Koustaal from Grass Valley who feels that the industry doesn’t entirely appreciate the value software as it’s less tangible than hardware but Pierre Mestrez from Simplylive makes the point that creating products quickly in a modular way is an important part of that company’s success. Zero Density makes the point that they can work quickly as they can build their software on top of other software, Unreal Engine, for example.

Troubleshooting changes for those who run of the systems, we hear from Laurent Petit from EVS. It takes a different set of thinking and processes compared to the idea of swapping a card. The transition to IP, adds Marcel, creates a training opportunity where the technology and the workflows are changing at the same time.

Kuban Altan compares the ability with audio to be processed in real time, easily, by CPUs, by consumer laptops with the future of video processing. Whilst now it’s not so easy to process video with CPUs at the moment, this will change over the coming decade as CPUs improve significantly. Moreover, Kuban looks towards a day where IO is reduced between devices and rather stays within the same CPU/GPU.

The move to software is a global trend, states Laurent, partly because of the imperative to work quickly and efficiently in our small industry whereby we can benefit by building on software developed for similar uses in other industries. The move will take time, however explains Marcel, and will take longer than bringing online the technology itself.

The video ends with a discussion of how clearly hardware-bound devices such as cameras can still embrace software in order, in the future, to create lighter, more flexible cameras which will improve the range of what you can do with each camera and, ultimately, enhance the creative options available to programme makers.

Watch now!
Speakers

Kuban Altan Kuban Altan
Vice President Research and Development,
Zero Density
Marcel Koutstaal Marcel Koutstaal
Senior Vice President and General Manager of Camera Product Group,
Grass Valley
Pierre Mestrez Pierre Mestrez
VP Pre-Sales & Channel Partners,
Simplylive
Laurent Petit Laurent Petit
SVP Product,
EVS

Video: The next enhancement for RIST

Continuing the look at RIST, the developing protocol which allows for reliable streaming over the internet – even in the event of packet loss, we have a look at a key feature on the roadmap.

The core proposition of RIST is to produce an interoperable protocol which brings the internet into the list of ways to contribute and distribute low-latency video. It’s resilient to packet loss due to it’s ability to re-request packets which have been lost yet is light enough for video streaming. In another talk at IBC, we learn about the latest developments which have added security and many other features to the list of capabilities.

Here, Adi Rozenberg from VideoFlow explains how this will further be extended by upcoming work to allow the source stream to reduce in bitrate in response to reduced capacity in the network. With RIST’s ARQ – the technology which requests missing packets – we find that the retransmissions can actually aggravate bitrate constrictions particularly when they are permanent. Adi proposes the only real way to solve lack of bandwidth issues is to reduce the bitrate of the source.

RIST already includes NULL packet removal so that NULL packets aren’t transmitted and are re-inserted at the remote end. This is usually a great start in reducing the bitrate of the stream. However more is needed, we need a way to tell the encoder to reduce the bandwidth of the video stream itself. This can be accomplished by RTCP.

Adi identifies the problem of identifying when extra bandwidth has returned as a reduction of bandwidth is quickly and easily signalled with retransmissions, but excess bandwidth silently returns. The system gradually increases the encoder bandwidth to always be probing the current balance of bandwidth and bitrate.

This works well when there is a single encoder and a single decoder. When there are multiple decoders, life is more difficult. The solution offered to this is to create a ladder of bitrates all of which are adaptable. Now the destination can switch between profiles. This can be extended to MPTS (Multi-Program Transport Streams) whereby, depending on the destination, services in the MPTS are dropped in order to recover bandwidth. A mechanism is used which prioritises services depending on the destination (i.e. German channels are de-prioritised on delivery to France).

The session ends with a Q&A on stream switching details and use in stat mixing.

Watch now!
Speakers

Adi Rozenberg Adi Rozenberg
CTO,
VideoFlow