What is new in HEVC/ " H.265 "

Journal of Imaging

The audiovisual entertainment industry has entered a race to find the video encoder offering the best Rate/Distortion (R/D) performance for high-quality high-definition video content. The challenge consists in providing a moderate to low computational/hardware complexity encoder able to run Ultra High-Definition (UHD) video formats of different flavours (360°, AR/VR, etc.) with state-of-the-art R/D performance results. It is necessary to evaluate not only R/D performance, a highly important feature, but also the complexity of future video encoders. New coding tools offering a small increase in R/D performance at the cost of greater complexity are being advanced with caution. We performed a detailed analysis of two evolutions of High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) video standards, Joint Exploration Model (JEM) and Versatile Video Coding (VVC), in terms of both R/D performance and complexity. The results show how VVC, which represents the new direction of future standards, has, for th...

log2_min_luma_coding_block_size-specify the minimal CU size. Potential usage: if a priory known that a video sequence is "flat" or "smooth" then it's worth to consider setting log2_min_luma_coding_block_size = 4 (16x16). Otherwise split-flags at the depth 16x16 are redundantly signaled. log2_diff_max_min_luma_coding_block_size-together with log2_min_luma_coding_block_size specify CTU size. There is no reason (excepting maybe a legacy to H.264/AVC) to set CTU size smaller than 64x64. Moreover, according to [8], 64 × 64-sized CTU brings nearly 12% bitrate reduction on the average compared with 16×16-sized CTU. log2_min_transform_block_sizespecify the minimal transform block size. Potential usage, in case of "flat" video sequence it's worth to consider setting log2_min_transform_block_size to 8x8. log2_diff_max_min_transform_block_sizetogether with the minimal TB size specifies the maximal TB size. Large transform sizes can cause performance peaks therefore it's worth consider to avoid 32x32 transforms by setting maximal transform size to 16x16.

—High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) is currently being prepared as the newest video coding standard of the ITU-T Video Coding Experts Group and the ISO/IEC Moving Picture Experts Group. The main goal of the HEVC standardization effort is to enable significantly improved compression performance relative to existing standards—in the range of 50% bit-rate reduction for equal perceptual video quality. This paper provides an overview of the technical features and characteristics of the HEVC standard. Index Terms—Advanced video coding (AVC), H.264, High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding (JCT-VC), Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG), MPEG-4, standards, Video Coding Experts Group (VCEG), video compression.

IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2000

IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2013

High definition video is becoming popular day by day due to desire for superior level quality and high resolution video. The upcoming High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) standard is designed to serve diverse range of applications like HDTV, video conferencing, fast internet streaming and videophone. This paper describes the performance analysis of HEVC with H.264/AVC video coding standard. Various 1920x1080 resolution high definition sequences are used to check the efficiency of HEVC. Simulation results show that HEVC in comparison to H.264 results in 52 % (average) bit rate improvement without significantly affecting the subjective and objective quality of video.

High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) is newest video coding standard, It also known as H.265 and MPEG-supports resolutions up to 8192×4320. The main aim of the HEVC is bit rate reduction, the average bit rate reduction fo 62% for 1080p, and 64% for 4K UHD. This paper presents an overview of the reduction features and characteristics of the HEVC standard. Keyword: H.264, High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding (JCT-VC), MPEG

Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 2006

The video coding standards are being developed to satisfy the requirements of applications for various purposes, better picture quality, higher coding efficiency, and more error robustness. The new international video coding standard H.264/MPEG-4 part 10 aims at having significant improvements in coding efficiency, and error robustness in comparison with the previous standards such as MPEG-2, H.263, MPEG-4 part 2. This paper describes an overview of H.264/MPEG-4 part 10. We focus on the detailed features like coding algorithm and error resilience of new standard, and compare the coding schemes with the other standards. The performance comparisons show that H.264 can achieve a coding efficiency improvement of about 1.5 times or greater for each test sequence related to multimedia, SDTV and HDTV.

In this paper we compare compression efficiency of the latest video coding standards H.265/HEVC, VP9, VP10 and Daala to H.264/AVC with the help of reference video encoders available. Experimental results show that H.265/HEVC on average provides 37–40% bitrate savings, VP9 provides 9– 11%, VP10 – 10–12% bitrate savings, while Daala provides 8-9% bitrate overhead on average.

2008

H.264/AVC is a recently completed video compression standard jointly developed by ITU-T VCEG and ISO/IEC MPEG standards committees. The standard is becoming more popular as it promises much higher compression than that possible with earlier standards. The standard provides flexibilities in coding and organization of data which enable efficient error resilience. The increased coding efficiency offers new application areas and business opportunities. As might be expected, the increases in compression efficiency and flexibility come at the expense of increase in complexity, which is a fact that must be overcome. This paper provides an overview of the technical features of H.264 and summarizes the emerging studies related to new coding features of the standard. Key Words: H.264, AVC, video compression, inter mode decision, MCTF, SP/SI frames, HRD. 1.

Signal Processing: Image Communication, 2015

In the distributed video coding (DVC) context, predictive Intra coding plays an important role not only as one of the most meaningful (low encoding complexity) benchmarks but also as the adopted coding mode for the so-called key frames used in the most popular DVC architectures. While the first DVC codecs adopted the H.263 Intra codec to play this role, it became clear around 2005 that the (standard) Intra coding reference codec had evolved and should become the H.264/AVC Intra codec, which has been used since then by the DVC literature. However, while DVC solutions have been evolving since those times, also predictive video coding has evolved and a new predictive video coding standard has recently emerged, the High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) standard. To acknowledge this evolution and be fair with the predictive coding technology, the improved DVC solutions should now integrate and be compared with the improved and more relevant HEVC standard and not anymore with the H.264/AVC 10-year-old standard. In this context, this paper proposes to upgrade the DVC tools and benchmarking by adopting the HEVC Intra codec to take the role that the H.264/AVC Intra standard was previously playing. To assess the impact of this inevitable upgrade, an advanced, representative DVC solution has been adopted and its performance assessed and compared in the context of the H.264/AVC and HEVC standard frameworks. The compression efficiency and computational complexity experiments performed allow concluding that upgrading DVC solutions with HEVC Intra coding allows strengthening the DVC positioning in the video coding landscape. This conclusion highlights how the experiments performed in this paper are critical to define the new DVC status quo.