112 Friday 13.09.13 theibcdaily The path to HEVC
Paul Turner, VP of Enterprise Products, Telestream charts the adoption of streaming media codec HEVC
The quest for digital media file formats that offer more efficient use of bandwidth and better picture quality is constant. The incumbent codecs for video delivery are MPEG2/H.262 and MPEG4/H.264/AVC – both of which have been around for some time. The newest entrant is High
Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC or H.265), which promises improvements in both bitrate and picture quality. The stated goals of HEVC are: 1. To provide the same quality as H.264 in half the bandwidth or double the video quality in the same bandwidth 2. To provide the ability to deliver higher video resolutions – up to 8192x4320 Obviously, the ability to meet
these goals signifies a dramatic improvement over current standards. It also offers the potential to address the two most common technical frustrations expressed by consumers about watching video over the Internet: issues with the download stream and video quality. All modern codecs are, by
their nature, complex pieces of technology. Manufacturers can choose to license a third party product or develop their own solution, but there is a third possibility – the open source community. This is an approach that Telestream has used successfully in the past, adopting the x264 codec as an option in its AVC encoding.
Paul Turner: ‘A dramatic improvement over current standards’
The same opportunity exists for HEVC. Founded by Telestream and
MulticoreWare (and with a growing list of member companies), the HEVC Consortium was formed to develop the fastest, highest quality, open source HEVC software encoder. That effort has resulted in the release of the x265 codec. Details on the x265 open source project and the HEVC consortium are available at
x265.org. There are already over 1bn
smart phones and tablets capable of playing HEVC video simply by upgrading their software-based video codecs. However, for more entrenched technologies such as set-top cable and satellite boxes, new hardware will be required. The same is true for any Ultra HD services that may emerge (assuming that broadcasters can build business cases
for these services – that remains to be seen). For those reasons, I would
assert that the earliest adopters of HEVC are likely to be OTT companies and wireless providers. Not only are there HEVC-capable devices already in users’ hands, but these devices turn over much more rapidly than TVs and other residence- based video platforms (and certainly more than cable boxes), so those that are processor challenged are likely to be replaced in a short amount of time. For broadcasters, HEVC is
not likely to supplant MPEG-2 until ATSC 3.0 is released in late 2015. The rate of adoption may also be affected by business factors, such as whether HEVC is included in upgrades to popular internet media players such as the Flash Player, and the current lack of royalty or licensing structures by the standards bodies. However, there seems to be
little doubt that HEVC is better and that it’s coming. Customers can rest assured that Telestream will be there to help with the migration, regardless of the final delivery mechanism. 7.C12
Opinion Bridge introduces a trio
Bridge Technologies By Ian McMurray
Launching a number of new capabilities at IBC is Bridge
Technologies. Among these is what the company describes as an entirely new QoE (Quality of Experience) solution, enabling operators of Bridge systems to combine what Bridge claims is the industry’s most
sophisticated QoS capability with state of the art QoE monitoring – all running on the same Bridgetech infrastructure, and with support for QoE monitoring of regionally-inserted material.
HEVC has grunt: experimental
end-to-end delivery from the French Open
HEVC gets a new opening
ATEME By Ian McMurray
The French Tennis Federation (FFT) and France Télévisions chose ATEME’s digital compression technology to inaugurate the new 4K television format during the 2013 French Open event. The French Open also included a world’s first in the form of a live experimental end-to-end delivery chain for the HEVC codec. The trial, conducted by the 4EVER consortium that includes Orange and ATEME, used the new codec to encode, stream over the Orange fibre network, broadcast over the air using DVB-T2, decode and display the live competition on PC, TV and tablet.
Also new for IBC2013 is a second generation OTT Engine that makes MPEG-DASH support a core part of the user’s OTT monitoring capability. It is compatible with all Bridge Technologies 1G and 10G probes, and part of the iOS and Android PocketProbe mobile monitoring apps. To ensure the widest possible compatibility with future, current and legacy
“We are very proud to once again be at the forefront of the latest technological
developments in television,” said Bernard Fontaine, innovation tech director, France Télévisions Digital Editions. “Through the dedicated efforts of our partners, we were able to successfully provide visitors with a look at the future of broadcast television during one of the largest tennis events in the world.” “ATEME is honoured to be a contributor in the innovation that was showcased at this major event,” said Michel Artières, founder, president and CEO, ATEME. “This is a great example of how the combined efforts of dedicated professionals can result in driving innovation in the broadcast industry.” 1.D71
OTT operations, Bridge Technologies’ new OTT Engine extends its HLS, Smoothstream and MPEG-DASH capability by adding support for RTMP and subtitle tracks. A third announcement is said by Bridge to be the first of a new line of products. The VB273 module is designed for Bridge Technologies’ new carrier-grade intelligent redundancy switching solution for satellite uplinks, and works with a VB272 and VB120 in a redundant chassis to monitor two signals from dual production chains and switches to the backup chain if the main chain fails.
First of a new line: The VB273 is said to ‘far outstrip’ ETR alarm analysers and black box switchers
An automatic decision engine uses Bridge’s ETR290 analysis functionality and compares error condition results against user defined rules. 1.A30
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124