HEVC support?

[Panzer Platform]

You forgot the image quality measurement!

I didn't forget the image quality measurement if I never intended to do it. lol
I guess you should have said I "omitted" the image quality measurement.
And if you don't stop it with the unnecessary exclamation points you are going to drive me to drink. lol
-Chuck

 

[Lothar]

I'm not sure what a 30% increase in video quality looks like. Is it something you would notice?

I don't think a 30% increase in bitrate equals 30% more readable license plates, which is what we are really interested in.

It may not equal exactly that but it should definitely lead to more detail overall in the video/image for sure.
And of course, the higher you go the more possible that there might be diminishing returns (things not noticeable to the human eye)...Just like the difference between 1080p vs 4K on a TV is noticeable, but 4K vs 8K probably not as much.

Using the example here on an A139 non-pro:
The difference between "H.264 Maximum" 27.8Mb/s and "H.264 Normal" 19.5Mb/s is 30%... 0.7 x 27.8 Mb/s = 19.46Mb/s
If there is no noticeable improvement between "Normal" and "Maximum", then why would Viofo even allow a "Maximum" and "High" bitrate setting at all to begin with is the question?
I only have one dashcam...Some of you peeps that receive free cameras or have multiple cameras are free to test this out side by side and share your results.




What are the different bitrate settings (low, normal, high and maximum) on the A139 Pro while running H.264 vs H.265?

 

[Nigel]

But you seem to be basing this image quality improvement on the fact that if you switch to H265 then you gain 30% extra bitrate, which is not actually true, on most cameras the bitrate reduces when you select H265!

If you still have the same bitrate after the switch to H265 then any gain in image quality, if there is any, has to come from elsewhere, not from the bitrate.

 

[Dashmellow]

I disagree 100%. lol
Of course H.265 is superior in theory with 30%-50% data compression over H.264.
But the "world" is just not ready for it yet.
Laptop manufactures are still pumping out 720p displays.
Smartphone manufactures are still pumping out 480p displays.
By the time 720P & 1080P display screens have been abolished, and everything is 4K the "world" will not be compatible with H.265.
I just had to google "AV1 Codec" because I "never heard of her".
I consider myself to be somewhat "tech savvy" and that right there should tell you how wrong I am. lol
-Chuck

I agree completely. H.265 is slowly making its way into the mainstream but it is far from ubiquitous.

One thing I've learned as a member of this forum for more than 9 years is that most forum members have never been in a position of having to submit footage to insurance companies, law enforcement, prosecutors, attorney's offices, courts of law, or whomever. Many folks imagine what they would do with their footage when the time comes but the reality is often far different.

Often there is a chain of custody where your video is handed off from one party to the next in an organization as your case is adjudicated. All it takes is one person in the chain of custody who does not have a computer capable of handling H.265 (or any other compression scheme) and your matter can easily end up being set aside or disposed of completely as they move on to the next case during a busy day. In all likelihood, the person who is unable to view your video will have no idea what the term "H.265" or "HEVC" even means, much less what to do about an unwatchable video.

I learned about this first hand several years ago when I had to submit a variety of dash cam videos and CCTV videos to law enforcement, attorneys and a prosecutor's office due to a criminal harassment matter.

The goal with dash cam videos that you may eventually be required to submit for a legal or insurance matter (and all dash cam video actually) is to ensure that your videos are as absolutely idiot-proof as possible so that ANYONE can view them regardless of their technical skills and no matter what vintage equipment and software they may have available to them. There are still a lot of older computers, operating systems and other software in use out there. Again, all you need is ONE key individual who can't view your video.

For now at least, forget about all the finer points of these compression schemes and extra bitrates, etc., and concentrate on producing the best quality imagery that is as easy as possible for anyone to watch. Many people seem to forget that we are attempting to capture actionable legal evidence with our dash cams. It doesn't matter if the leaves of trees and certain other details are not perfectly rendered or whether you use up a bit more space on your memory card. Using the latest compression scheme may be counterproductive when it comes down to what matters the most when using a dash cam. Go with the lowest common denominator universally available.

 

[Panzer Platform]

Often there is a chain of custody where your video is handed off from one party to the next in an organization as your case is adjudicated. All it takes is one person in the chain of custody who does not have a computer capable of handling H.265 (or any other compression scheme) and your matter can easily end up being set aside or disposed of completely as they move on to the next case during a busy day.

Right on Mellow,
Thank you for saving my “damsel in distress”. Lol
My favorite point you make is making these things “idiot proof” so the lowest entry level government employee can’t possibly screw things up. Lol

The first time I learned of my disdain for H.265 was when I reviewed a GNET dash cam for BBMC. Not only was it H.265 with no H.264 option it required the use of proprietary software (JDR File System) to view the recorded footage on a computer. So this meant I could only view the raw footage on my tiny iPhone screen, instead of my lovely 32” monitor connected to my Chromebook, (Chrombooks can not download software meant for Windows PC / Mac). Chromebooks can only surf the web, and send email basically. For $100 that’s kind of why I like them. It’s almost like a KISS computer, (keep it simple stupid). Lol

During testing of the GNET dash cam I could just imagine a consumer getting in a wreck, and handing over the original SD Card to the police, or government agency and saying; “Oh by the way the footage is encoded in H.265 AND you will need to download an unknown third party proprietary software program to your government issued PC to view the footage”. LMAO.
I’m a retired government employee, and if this happened at my agency we would basically tell the consumer, sorry no can do.
-Chuck

 

[Lothar]

But you seem to be basing this image quality improvement on the fact that if you switch to H265 then you gain 30% extra bitrate, which is not actually true, on most cameras the bitrate reduces when you select H265!

If you still have the same bitrate after the switch to H265 then any gain in image quality, if there is any, has to come from elsewhere, not from the bitrate.

The keyword here is "Most". This does not happen in all cameras.
This does not seem to be the same case with Blackvue DR900X dashcam? It records at 25Mbps/10Mbps front/rear regardless of if you select H.264 or H.265 on the "Extreme" quality setting. There is no reduction in bitrate to switching from H.264 to H.265?


This is also not "really" the case with Street Guardian 9667DC2K either from my experience. There is no reduction in bitrate for the front camera going from H.264 to H.265, but there is a slight reduction in the rear camera bitrate. The front camera is usually more important than the rear anyway so I'm okay with that trade, and if I consider that H.265 is 30% more efficient than H.264, then I'm not losing anything anyway.

My only guess is that if this happens (in the case of Blackvue/Street Guardian), the only thing it tells me is that the company put an artificial limitation on the camera recording at H.264 (meaning it maybe capable of running at slightly higher bitrate in H.264 than the quoted official spec) and that it is not necessarily actual limitation of the product itself? or maybe the only trade-off for this is extra heat but the camera still remains within the operating temperature specification range as cited by the manufacturer and therefore no changes are needed?

So where do you think such a gain comes from then? I'm not sure exactly what your argument is here as it seems to be circular logic?
H.265@25Mbps is superior to H.264@25Mbps in image quality. That is a fact.
Do I know whether it increases license plate visibility by exactly 30% or whether this only helps with leaves on trees? I don't know, and I hope that I don't ever have to find out but I also don't want to take the chance that it misses something either by not running at the highest quality possible available that the manufacturer specification allows. Of course again, there might be diminishing returns at some point and I have no idea where they lie. That is for those that have 2 equivalent cameras side by side to find out for us.

 

[Lothar]

Right on Mellow,
Thank you for saving my “damsel in distress”. Lol
My favorite point you make is making these things “idiot proof” so the lowest entry level government employee can’t possibly screw things up. Lol

The first time I learned of my disdain for H.265 was when I reviewed a GNET dash cam for BBMC. Not only was it H.265 with no H.264 option it required the use of proprietary software (JDR File System) to view the recorded footage on a computer. So this meant I could only view the raw footage on my tiny iPhone screen, instead of my lovely 32” monitor connected to my Chromebook, (Chrombooks can not download software meant for Windows PC / Mac). Chromebooks can only surf the web, and send email basically. For $100 that’s kind of why I like them. It’s almost like a KISS computer, (keep it simple stupid). Lol

During testing of the GNET dash cam I could just imagine a consumer getting in a wreck, and handing over the original SD Card to the police, or government agency and saying; “Oh by the way the footage is encoded in H.265 AND you will need to download an unknown third party proprietary software program to your government issued PC to view the footage”. LMAO.
I’m a retired government employee, and if this happened at my agency we would basically tell the consumer, sorry no can do.
-Chuck

Yeah, I laughed at their dashcam and moved on when I saw that one has to install some special software when I saw them announce it to us on the forums last year.

 

[Nigel]

H.265@25Mbps is superior to H.264@25Mbps in image quality. That is a fact.

I don't have a Blackvue to test, but I would be interested to see a demonstration of a 30% increase in image quality when changing from "H.265@25Mbps" to "H.264@25Mbps". when driving at 60 mph with trees beside the road. When I have tried a similar test on other equipment, I have found it hard to see a difference.