[Implemented] VP9 support

Archive of historical feature requests.
Please use the GitHub link above to report issues.
Forum rules
*******************************

Please be aware we are now using GitHub for issue tracking and feature requests.

- This forum is now closed to new topics.
- Existing topics will remain open for a short while as the transition over occurs.
*******************************
Marsu42
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:03 pm

Re: [Planned] VP9 support

Post by Marsu42 » Sun Feb 21, 2016 10:29 pm

Prey, since I started compiling hb myself to include fdk-aac: Is there a patch available that simply replaces vp8 by vp9 w/o the necessity to change any gui? The default build uses "--enable-vp8-encoder --disable-vp9", but I guess there would have to be some renaming to be done. Rationale is that probably no one uses vp8, but some people might use vp9 no matter how slow it is.

Djfe
Bright Spark User
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 8:01 pm

Re: [Planned] VP9 support

Post by Djfe » Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:05 am

I don't think renaming would be enough and the reason they don't include it, yet, is afaik usability and not that it's hard to implement

Just use ffmpeg instead ;)

Marsu42
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:03 pm

Re: [Planned] VP9 support

Post by Marsu42 » Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:22 am

Djfe wrote:I don't think renaming would be enough and the reason they don't include it
True dat - just tried it, plus and in the most reccent libvpx 1.5.0 or master some minor changes occurred that break the build. Pity, but I will *never* give up home to use my beloved hb to web-encode for all current browsers (i.e. aac+h264 and opus+vp9) ... hope dies last, and I'm positive we'll see vp9 inclusion once vp10 is released :->

Agamemnoid
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 2:32 am

Re: [Implemented] VP9 support

Post by Agamemnoid » Sat Dec 31, 2016 2:35 am

New Years Eve 2016 and the VP9 speed is still terrible. It manages to reach about 50% usage on 2 threads out of 12 on my i7-4930k for a total CPU usage of around 10%.

It's so sad this can't be used to full effect. I upload so much stuff to YouTube and I hate seeing it get re-encoded every time :(

mduell
Veteran User
Posts: 6446
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 8:54 pm

Re: [Implemented] VP9 support

Post by mduell » Sat Dec 31, 2016 6:48 am

Youtube will re-encode regardless of what you upload.

ddwrt
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:20 pm

Re: [Implemented] VP9 support

Post by ddwrt » Sat Dec 31, 2016 5:25 pm

Agamemnoid wrote:New Years Eve 2016 and the VP9 speed is still terrible. It manages to reach about 50% usage on 2 threads out of 12 on my i7-4930k for a total CPU usage of around 10%.

It's so sad this can't be used to full effect. I upload so much stuff to YouTube and I hate seeing it get re-encoded every time :(
Just wait for VP10, it is the one which is improving now. Or for the major project from Microsoft, Google, Adobe, Nvidia, etc - http://aomedia.org/

Djfe
Bright Spark User
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 8:01 pm

Re: [Implemented] VP9 support

Post by Djfe » Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:05 am

to add to what mduell said:
Use H.264/x264 with High Profile, the source fps (try to make sure the source records in 30 fps or a multiple of it, but don't convert to that fps) and the source resolution
The Bitrate should be between 8 and 16mbit/s
for the audio use something like 196kbit/s or 256kbit/s aac
stuff I didn't mention probably doesn't matter or is up to you

Agamemnoid
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 2:32 am

Re: [Implemented] VP9 support

Post by Agamemnoid » Tue Jan 03, 2017 2:16 am

Djfe wrote:to add to what mduell said:
Use H.264/x264 with High Profile, the source fps (try to make sure the source records in 30 fps or a multiple of it, but don't convert to that fps) and the source resolution
The Bitrate should be between 8 and 16mbit/s
for the audio use something like 196kbit/s or 256kbit/s aac
stuff I didn't mention probably doesn't matter or is up to you
I do that, my gameplay is recorded in 30fps lossless and I encode it at source frame rate profile 4.0 RF 20 Very Slow preset and the bitrate is just a touch under 8mbit/s. Sometimes if I download the 1080p copy from YouTube it's the exact same file, sometimes it is not.

Yes YouTube processes everything, they create 720p and 480p versions and such. But when the 1080p version is the identical file it looks spectacular, when it's not the same file it looks worse with artifacts I can see easily.

My understanding was that YouTube was less likely to convert VP9 files. Does anybody know differently? Can you prove it? I'd love to know so that I'm not wasting time.
ddwrt wrote:Just wait for VP10, it is the one which is improving now. Or for the major project from Microsoft, Google, Adobe, Nvidia, etc -
Google announced in September 2015 that they aren't doing VP10 any more, instead contributing to AV1.

Post Reply