HEVC and HEIF for iPhone

>>60840944
I really don't get the difference between image codecs, all I know is its proprietary

>>60840944
Apple owns HEVC patents.

Apple doesn't own AV1 patents.

>>60840944
webm and webp is dead

http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2017/05/velos-media-hevc-patent-pool.html

HEVC is dead

3 patent pools, lol

>>60841028
4chan can't even add support for VP9 WebMs.

VP8 WebM only happened because moot got that engineer friend from Google to work on 4chan backend for a couple months.

File: MonsterReborn-YGLD-EN-C-1E-C.png (354KB, 308x450px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 308x450px

>What happened?
Apple's turn.

>>60840944
>What happened?
A --$$$--> B

Everyone but Google and Mozilla is already behind HEVC. Apple's unambiguous support will be the tipping point to ensure it becomes the de-facto next-generation standard codec for video and still images.

Google's new flavor-of-the-week pet codec (AV1) isn't even finished yet and will likely be technically inferior to HEVC. By the time they actually support it on Pajeetdroid and MinecraftTube, HEVC will be well on its way to domination.

File: 2576cba35b746dcc435ef1f3a9….jpg (42KB, 520x592px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 520x592px

>>60841342
All the retard needs to do is search for the VP9 header (like any piece of software does, there are standard libs for this) and whitelist it.

Not that hard.

Why is AV1 taking soooo long?

And is Apple the only company that records videos in HEVC format on their hardware? I don't think anybody else does.

>>60844012
>And is Apple the only company that records videos in HEVC format on their hardware? I don't think anybody else does.

They only just announced their support in the new macOS and iOS releases coming in the Fall.

While more recent Apple devices will encode in HEVC, the OS will seamlessly transcode to an older format (like H.264 or JPEG) when sharing with web services / social media or non-Apple devices or older Apple devices that are too slow to perform software decoding.

Microsoft is effectively out of the mobile game, and you can bet Google is going to drag its feet on HEVC much like it has with every new codec that isn't their own. It may come down to the commercial camera companies (Blackmagic, Sony, etc) to decide which format will win out.

Worst case scenario is neither side budges and we're effectively stuck with the legacy codecs for their wide compatibility, while video services like Netflix provide separate codec streams for each vendor.

AV1 will reign supreme

UHD bluray is on the brink of death anyways. Mofos cant even pick a HDR standard.

>>60844268
>It may come down to the commercial camera companies (Blackmagic, Sony, etc) to decide which format will win out.

Video producers store their raw footage uncompressed and later convert them into a consumer codec, usually on a Mac.

Apple's got this.

File: 1469309230745.png (2MB, 1011x3032px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1011x3032px

So how much better is HEIF than WebP which is already 50% better than JPG, lossless PNG, and even GIF?

I get the feeling HEIF won't ever take off just like BPG because of the retarded usage fee thing.

>>60844399
>22.5GB/minute for uncompressed 1080p 60fps video
Shut up you fucking retard.

>>60843734
Turns out neither hiro nor any of the 4chan's employees can do something so simple.

>>60844268
>you can bet Google is going to drag its feet on HEVC much like it has with every new codec that isn't their own

Most of AV1 is Google's.

Google has a great interest in seeing AV1 out the door as soon as possible since they pay massive royalties to MPEG-LA to use H.264/AVC on YouTube to stream to devices that don't support VP9.

Torrents will decide what will become the standard
Like porn did for VHS

>>60840944
Why would HEVC be dead? Even the cheapest MediaTek and Qualcomm phones have had support for it for years. AMD finally put HEVC GPU decoding on their graphics cards starting with the RX 4xx cards (wtf, AMD?). Intel have put HEVC hardware decoding into their CPUs.

It's finally getting to where it's generally supported by enough devices to be a real alternative. Interestingly phones support VP9 too but AMD GPUs don't (wtf, AMD?).

>>60843693
I am all for VP9 and AV1 for the same reasons Google and Mozilla are; it's free. So is HEVC outside of the US, obviously, but since a lot of corporations are based there and a lot of corporations want to sell to those there we all have to consider the US's imaginary property rights.

>>60844012
My Axon 7 records videos in HEVC or H.264 depending on what you're doing.

>>60843693
Now that you mention it, this is looking pretty likely. It's really a bummer because this means we'll continue to be stuck with a proprietary, patent-encumbered web.

>>60847110
I don't understand why third-party companies prioritize proprietary formats in their products. Implement VP9 hardware decoding for free...or pay a fee for HEVC? The choice seems clear to me.

>>60843693
>Everyone but Google and Mozilla is already behind HEVC.

http://aomedia.org/about-us/

>Adobe
>Allegro DVT
>Amazon
>AMD
>Amlogic
>ARM
>Ateme
>BBC Research & Development
>Bitmovin
>Broadcom
>Chips&Media
>Cisco
>Google
>Intel
>Ittiam
>Microsoft
>Mozilla
>Netflix
>Nvidia
>Polycom
>Realtek
>Socionext
>VeriSilicon
>VideoLAN
>Vidyo
>Xilinx

File: AOMedia-Group-The-Alliance-for-Open-Media.png (106KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1200x1200px

>>60843693
How can HEVC even compete with this?

>>60850033
The same way in competed with daala. AV1 will never make it out of the "I'll make the logo" phase.

>>60850033
It's kind of interesting. The companies endorsing AV1 are all tech companies, while the endorsing HEVC are a bit more diverse: Hitachi, Dolby, GE, Samsung, the BBC.

File: BBC_3.jpg (17KB, 620x413px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 620x413px

>>60850319
>the BBC.
Man, they're not even hiding it anymore.

>>60850319
>>60850337
I should maybe rephrase this a bit. I was conflating "endorsing HEVC" with "licensing HEVC;" I was picking those companies from this list: https://www.elecard.com/page/aom_av1_vs_hevc
and actually they are just licensees, rather than members of the working group. Still, I view their decision to license it as a form of endorsement. The BBC has decided to do both, so I guess they're just waiting to see how it plays out.