PDA

View Full Version : FYI AVCHD the new Sony/Panasonic HD standard



Texture
06-30-2006, 11:51 AM
Thought you all might find this article interesting...


From TV TECHNOLOGY vol.24, no. 14 - June 28, 2006

Sony, Panasonic Launch AVCHD
New hi-def standard could be an effective competitor to HDV.
by Craig Johnston


Seattle
Several weeks after NAB 2006 shut its doors, the Japanese offices of broadcast equipment powerhouses Panasonic and Sony announced a new video format: AVCHD. "AVC" stands for Advanced Video Coding. You know what "HD" stands for.

Why wait until after the big show to roll it out? AVCHD is aimed at consumer DVD camcorders. But given the capabilities the new format brings, it wouldn't be surprising to see it follow the pathway of the DV format, which was originally touted for consumer level video camera, then ended up being adapted all the way to high-definition.

For now, comparisons with AVCHD can be made against HDV, the other consumer or prosumer grade HD video format, which rolled out just a few years ago.

HDV records to tape. AVCHD records to 8 cm (about 3 1/4 inch) red laser DVDs. (Panasonic, in a separate announcement, said it is also developing solid-state-memory products for AVCHD.)

HDV compresses to and records at 25 Mbps. AVCHD compresses to and records at 18 Mbps.

Both are long-GOP, meaning their compression stretches out over several frames rather than each frame's compression being contained within the individual frame itself. (This has ramifications for editing, and generally means more rendering time.)

HDV is and MPEG-2 codec, while AVCHD is MPEG-4, Part 10, also known as H.264.

Both can record at 1080i and 720p though it is unlikely that all camcorders will be able to switch between the two.

Not to forget audio, AVCHD employs Dolby Digital or Linear PCM for an audio codec.

Nothing earth-shattering about the comparison between the two formats, so far. But then you get down to this line of the release: "The MPEG-4/H.264 codec is a promising technology which is over two times more efficient than MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 codec technologies."

While not singling out HDV in the release, the companies are saying that AVCHD is at least twice as efficient as HDV. At twice the efficiency, a simple math exercise would show that with its 18 Mbps encoding, AVCHD is 28 percetn more efficient on the storage side, and that would still allow AVCHD to produce about a 70 percent increase in picture quality over HDV.

One key it the camcorder format is that it is designed for "red laser" 8cm DVDs, which are relatively cheap. The same size Blu-ray consumer data disks cost around $20 dollars each. Both types of the new HD DVD players are expected to be able to playback AVCHD disks.

Sony and Panasonic also chose to use the MPEG-2 transport stream. Though it has nothing to do with the encoding, the MPEG-2 transport stream was chosen because modern digital TVs and set-top boxes already work with it.

PROS AND CONS-UMERS
Perusing Web postings about the new format, this writer found them generally impressed with AVCHD and predicting a quick demise of HDV. Among the comments were references to the fragility of DV-size tape as a recording media, and the problems with drop-out in an I-frame of the long-GOP encoding.

On the negative side, posters pointed out the one hour recording time f and HDV tape versus the approximately 20-minute recoding time of the 8cm red laser DVDs, and questioned the battery life of an AVCHD camcorder with its more computationally intensive encoding scheme.

Nonlinear editing vendors including avid and Adobe are reported to be working to support AVCHD. Th the extent they've developed technology to handle the long-GOP issues with HDV, that technology should be applicable to AVCHD's long-GOP as well.
At this writing, none of the other camcorder manufacturers TV TECHNOLOGY contacted have announced plans for an AVCHD camcorder, though the joint Sony and Panasonic announcement notes: "The two companies have started preparations of licensing to extensively promote the format throughout the industry."

One representative from Panasonics's professional division did weigh in his reservations over the use of AVCHD for professional video production.

"If you buy into our position that HDV is not at a level that a professional would want to shoot at, because of the amount of compression involved, then yes, I would say that this follows that same philosophy," said Phil LIvingston, Panasonic's technical liaison.

Toward that end, Panasonic introduced an option for its new AJ-HPC2000 P2 HD camcorder to allow it to encode with the MPEG-4/H.264 codec, but at 50Mbps. A sony spokesman said the company currently has no plans to incorporate AVCHD technology into its professional video camcorder product line for broadcast and production.

So is AVCHD going to end up following DV's path to become a full-fledged professional video format? It's still early in the game.

"The reason this is all taking time to roll out is that for the H.264 compression standard, in relative terms, the ink is just getting dry," said Livingston.

Barry_Green
06-30-2006, 03:38 PM
I'm a lot less reserved about this; I think AVC-HD is absolutely going to replace HDV. It's better in so many ways, and where it's not better it's equivalent.

AVC-HD is long-GOP and 4:2:0, so is HDV, so so far they're somewhat equivalent. But from there, AVC-HD has it all over HDV: it's full raster recording in both modes (so 1920x1080 instead of 1440x1080), it's H.264 is twice as efficient as HDV (so equivalent to about 36 megabits of MPEG-2), it has native support for 24p in both modes, it's multistandard compatible (so Sony footage will play on Panasonic gear, and Panasonic footage will play on Sony gear, unlike the three-way incompatibility that permeates current HDV), and in audio it just plain smokes HDV: 7.1 channels of uncompressed PCM audio, or 5.1 channels of Dolby Digital AC-3 audio, vs. HDV's two channels of MPEG-1 compressed audio? No comparison at all.

Plus it's tapeless and dropout-proof.

Then it comes to the question of H.264 vs. MPEG-2. MPEG-2 has been the prevailing standard, but everything's going H.264. Satellite TV is already using it, Europe's HDTV transmissions will be H.264, the american ATSC is talking about adding H.264 to its transmission standards, IPTV uses H.264 as the foundation for its technology, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD play H.264, everybody and everything is going H.264.

It's not a perfect format, obviously; it will have the same long-GOP issues as any other long-GOP format. But if someone was already satisfied with HDV quality, they should be thrilled with AVC-HD quality because it's better in so many ways.

As to why they announced it a few weeks after NAB, instead of *at* NAB? I can only speculate, but let's imagine it went like this:

INT. SONY CORPORATE OFFICES
Execs from the various divisions sit around sharing their plans for introductions and press releases at the upcoming NAB conference. The Sony Broadcast Group rep finishes up.

BROADCAST REP:
... and finally, we're introducing XDCAM-HD. This is our new latest-and-greatest format, it's based on a refined version of MPEG-2 HDV, we're going to tell the world that they want to use this format.

At that point, a rep from Sony Consumer Products stands up.

CONSUMER REP:
HDV? That's dead. We're done with that, we're moving on. MPEG-2 is so old-hat. We're discontinuing the FX1, we're moving on to AVC-HD. MPEG-4 is where it's at.

At this point, the broadcast reps' jaws drop. Some start shrieking, some start fanning themselves for air and hyperventilating, and the head of Sony Broadcast starts staggering around the room like Fred Sanford faking a heart attack.

BROADCAST REP:
WHAT?!?! You can't announce that yet! Are you trying to kill our format? You'll put us out of business!

CONSUMER REP:
Can't fight the tide. We've already discontinued the FX1, we have to announce that.

At this point the broadcast rep pulls out a gun.

BROADCAST REP:
You'll do no such thing.

CONSUMER REP:
Well we're not making it anymore. We can't just let it wither away, we have to tell people something...!

The broadcast rep cocks the gun.

BROADCAST REP:
Don't tell them a thing. And don't announce this new format either.

At this point everyone else from the consumer division stands up and pulls their guns. And since there are a *lot* more consumer reps than broadcast reps, the Broadcast rep lowers his gun.

BROADCAST REP:
Okay, okay. But at least give me a few weeks to dupe our potential buyers into thinking this XDCAM-HD format is at least going to be relevant before you spring this AVC news on 'em.

CONSUMER REP:
Fine.

BROADCAST REP:
Fine.

CONSUMER REP:
Okay.

BROADCAST REP:
Fine then.

CONSUMER REP:
You may have won this round, but we will announce. And just for being so difficult, we're going to continue to make our consumer-division equipment incompatible with your broadcast division cameras too*

(* subnote: true story. Sony consumer TVs with firewire inputs can play back HDV streams from a consumer-division FX1, but not from a broadcast-division Z1...)

------------------------

Okay, so maybe that's not exactly how it went down, but I can certainly see some nervous thumb-twiddling in the broadcast division over this whole thing. H.264 is the future, MPEG-2 is the past, and they're stuck squarely in the middle with their XDCAM-HD product. Especially since at 35 megabits of 4:2:0 MPEG-2, 18 megabits of AVC-HD is theoretically capable of matching the recording quality of XDCAM-HD. That can't make them too happy at all.

Texture
06-30-2006, 06:13 PM
At this point, glad I'm still using my VX-2000.

This next upgrade is going to be awesome!!!

Policar
06-30-2006, 08:26 PM
Sony's touting blu-ray as being superior since the extra space allows them to use MPEG-2 instead of H264 (and blu-ray discs are indeed encoded in MPEG-2).

So...at least according to some Sony execs, MPEG-2 (at high bitrates) is by far the superior format. Seems strange to me, but who knows...

baro
07-01-2006, 04:28 PM
H264 may be nice, but the recording capacity is only 1.36GB. Now when cheap SD cards can do much better than that, I'm uneasy to accept the fact that I will have a bulky shock sensitive disk drive in my camera instead of a memory card. For the only reason that it records onto a disk.

gilzoo
07-01-2006, 09:34 PM
Is this at all relevant to the HVX200?

ecking
07-05-2006, 05:34 AM
CONSUMER REP:
Can't fight the tide. We've already discontinued the FX1, we have to announce that.

At this point the broadcast rep pulls out a gun.

BROADCAST REP:
You'll do no such thing.



I'm sorry but reading that made me die with laughter!

Jarred Land
07-05-2006, 10:09 AM
H264 may be nice, but the recording capacity is only 1.36GB. Now when cheap SD cards can do much better than that, I'm uneasy to accept the fact that I will have a bulky shock sensitive disk drive in my camera instead of a memory card. For the only reason that it records onto a disk.

thats why panasonic is making memory cards to record to instead of disks.

im all for H264.. it seems to be what Mpeg was in the 90s.. or maybe even Divx.

EShy
07-05-2006, 01:08 PM
I always thought HDV was temporary and won't last and H264 is being talked about as the next standard for some time now, so this announcment isn't that surprising. but sony and panasonic working on a format together? now that's news.

for_mlove
07-05-2006, 01:37 PM
It's possible for Panny to make a PCMCIA card that would slide into the HVX and give it the ability to record to this format on a P2 card in the other slot right???

Oliver Rush
02-16-2010, 10:22 PM
Why would you want to record to AVCHD on your HVX/HPX when you have DVCPROHD? 4:2:0 vs. 4:2:2 and twice the bit-rate... seems like a no brainer on what codec to use.

dcloud
02-16-2010, 10:55 PM
revive a thread 4 yrs ago. weird.

Adam J McKay
02-17-2010, 03:36 AM
ya it would seem you would have to go searching to even find this hahaha

Jan_Crittenden
02-17-2010, 11:23 AM
I have to say it was a little freaky seeing my late husband being quoted. I had to go look at the date at the top. Woke me up from just browsing around.

;-)