Abstract
4K, ultra high-definition (UHD), and higher resolution video contents have become increasingly popular recently. The largely increased data rate casts great challenges to video compression and communication technologies. Emerging video coding methods are claimed to achieve superior performance for high-resolution video content, but thorough and independent validations are lacking. In this study, we carry out an independent and so far the most comprehensive subjective testing and performance evaluation on videos of diverse resolutions, bit rates and content variations, and compressed by popular and emerging video coding methods including H.264/AVC, H.265/HEVC, VP9, AVS2 and AV1. Our statistical analysis derived from a total of more than 36,000 raw subjective ratings on 1,200 test videos suggests that significant improvement in terms of rate-quality performance against the AVC encoder has been achieved by state-of-the-art encoders, and such improvement is increasingly manifest with the increase of resolution. Furthermore, we evaluate state-of-the-art objective video quality assessment models, and our results show that the SSIMplus measure performs the best in predicting 4K subjective video quality. The database will be made available online to the public to facilitate future video encoding and video quality research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alliance for Open Media: AV1 codec source code repository, June 2018. https://aomedia.googlesource.com/aom
Alliance for Open Media: The alliance for open media kickstarts video innovation era with “AV1” release, March 2018. https://aomedia.org/the-alliance-for-open-media-kickstarts-video-innovation-era-with-av1-release/
Bae, S.H., Kim, J., Kim, M., Cho, S., Choi, J.S.: Assessments of subjective video quality on HEVC-encoded 4K-UHD video for beyond-HDTV broadcasting services. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 59(2), 209–222 (2013)
Bjontegaard, G.: Calculation of average PSNR differences between RD-curves. In: ITU-T Q. 6/SG16, 33th VCEG Meeting (2001)
Bjontegaard, G.: Improvements of the BD-PSNR model, VCEG-AI11. In: ITU-T Q. 6/SG16, 34th VCEG Meeting (2008)
Cheon, M., Lee, J.S.: Subjective and objective quality assessment of compressed 4K UHD videos for immersive experience. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. 28(7), 1467–1480 (2018)
Deshpande, S.: Subjective and objective visual quality evaluation of 4K video using AVC and HEVC compression. In: SID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers, vol. 43, pp. 481–484 (2012)
Fröhlich, P., Egger, S., Schatz, R., Mühlegger, M., Masuch, K., Gardlo, B.: QoE in 10 seconds: are short video clip lengths sufficient for quality of experience assessment? In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience, pp. 242–247 (2012)
Google: libvpx, July 2018. https://chromium.googlesource.com/webm/libvpx.git
Hanhart, P., Rerabek, M., De Simone, F., Ebrahimi, T.: Subjective quality evaluation of the upcoming HEVC video compression standard. In: Applications of Digital Image Processing XXXV, vol. 8499, pp. 1–13 (2012)
ITU-R BT.500: Recommendation: methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures, January 2012
ITU-R BT.910: Recommendation: subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications, April 2008
Li, Z., Aaron, A., Katsavounidis, I., Moorthy, A., Manohara, M.: Toward a practical perceptual video quality metric, June 2016. https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/toward-a-practical-perceptual-video-quality-metric-653f208b9652
Li, Z., Vigier, T., Callet, P.L.: A VMAF model for 4K, March 2018. ftp://vqeg.its.bldrdoc.gov/Documents/VQEG\(\_\)Madrid\(\_\)Mar18/Meeting\(\_\)Files/VQEG\(\_\)SAM\(\_\)2018\(\_\)025\(\_\)VMAF\(\_\)4K.pdf
Liu, Y.: AV1 beats x264 and libvpx-vp9 in practical use case, April 2018. https://code.fb.com/video-engineering/av1-beats-x264-and-libvpx-vp9-in-practical-use-case/
Ma, K., et al.: Group MAD competition-a new methodology to compare objective image quality models. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 1664–1673 (2016)
Massimino, P.: AOM - AV1, How does it work? July 2017. https://parisvideotech.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/AOM-AV1-Video-Tech-meet-up.pdf
MultiCoreWare Inc.: x265, July 2018. https://bitbucket.org/multicoreware/x265
Pinson, M.H., Wolf, S.: A new standardized method for objectively measuring video quality. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 50(3), 312–322 (2004)
PKU-VCL: AVS2 technology (2018). http://www.avs.org.cn/avs2/technology.asp
PKU-VCL: AVS2 codec source code repository, January 2018. https://github.com/pkuvcl/xavs2
Rehman, A., Zeng, K., Wang, Z.: Display device-adapted video quality-of-experience assessment. In: Human Vision and Electronic Imaging XX, vol. 9394, pp. 1–11 (2015)
Řeřábek, M., Ebrahimi, T.: Comparison of compression efficiency between HEVC/H.265 and VP9 based on subjective assessments. In: Applications of Digital Image Processing Xxxvii, vol. 9217, pp. 1–13 (2014)
Tan, T., Mrak, M., Baroncini, V., Ramzan, N.: Report on HEVC compression performance verification testing. Joint Collab. Team Video Coding (JCT-VC) (2014)
VideoLAN: x264, July 2018. http://git.videolan.org/git/x264
Wang, Z., Bovik, A.C.: Mean squared error: love it or leave it? A new look at signal fidelity measures. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 26(1), 98–117 (2009)
Zhu, Y., Song, L., Xie, R., Zhang, W.: SJTU 4K video subjective quality dataset for content adaptive bit rate estimation without encoding. In: IEEE International Symposium on Broadband Multimedia Systems and Broadcasting, pp. 1–4 (2016)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
1 Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Li, Z., Duanmu, Z., Liu, W., Wang, Z. (2019). AVC, HEVC, VP9, AVS2 or AV1? — A Comparative Study of State-of-the-Art Video Encoders on 4K Videos. In: Karray, F., Campilho, A., Yu, A. (eds) Image Analysis and Recognition. ICIAR 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11662. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27202-9_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27202-9_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-27201-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-27202-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)