[opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 09:18:09 -0400
At 12:27 AM -0700 8/31/05, John Willkie wrote:
>In many places, MPEG was viewed largely as being off-shore. I even hear
>people talking about it being a "French" outfit. To which I ask "Leonardo
>Chiagrigniole (cq) founded a French outfit?"
It is very important to be clear about which MPEG standard we are
talking about.
MPEG-1 was put together by a subset of the companies that put
together the MPEG-2 standard. At the time it was developed, MPEG-1
was viewed as a multimedia standard, enabling the playback off video
on specially configured PCs and MPEG-1 enabled CD players. Philips
played a major role in MPEG-1 as they were very interested in
expanding the CD market. Sony and the rest of the Japanese CE
companies were not major players in MPEG-1. OTher major players in
ALL of the MPEG standards included Alcatel (The French Phone
company); Fraunhoffer Institute (Germany); Columbia University (US);
MIT (US); General Instruments which became Motorola (U.S.); and IBM
(U.S.); and Sarnoff Labs (funded by US and international companies).
Bell labs played a role early on until it was decimated.
MPEG-2 was a VERY DIFFERENT situation. By the early '90s GI had
demonstrated the feasibility of encoding both SD and HD, proving that
video compression was going to become an important technology for
mainstream video production and broadcast operations. At this point
the major CE companies jumped in with both feet and dominated the
process. The fact that Leonardo was educated in Japan and speaks the
language should not be overlooked - he had the ability to communicate
at a high level with all of the participants. The MPEG-2 effort was
well underway before the influx of participants and money form the
video centric companies. There was a STRONG movement to make MPEG-2
progressive only, because of the added efficiency of processing only
frame based material and the added quality possible with the
elimination of interlace.
The video companies had just completed "their" transition to digital,
creating the entire "uncompressed" digital infrastructure around the
international (and interlaced) ITU-R BT.601 standard. They perceived
MPEG-2 as a major threat, and moved rapidly to co-opt the standard to
their needs - i.e. the protection of interlaced SD.
Of particular note, much of the IP that was being considered for
MPEG-2 was entering the public domain. A major component of the
MPEG-2 standards effort was the re-invention of this IP to protect
the potential royalties for another 17-20 years. Virtually all of the
IP in MPEG-2 related to the coding of interlace was patented in the
1993-1995 time frame.
The MPEG-3 standard was skipped, as it was designated for the
encoding of HD. But the MPEG-2 standard incorporated this, so MPEG-3
never happened. Leonardo and his minions then set about the task of
developing MPEG-4, but they did not enjoy the same high levels of
support and funding from the companies that dominate the MPEG-2 IP
pool. The MPEG-4 standard was also viewed as a computer centric
multimedia standard. MPEG-4 Part 2 video was evolutionary at best,
providing only small (about 10%) improvements in compression
efficiency over MPEG-2. The one area where there has been some
interest from the video centric companies is in the extensions
related to encoding high quality video - Sony's HDCam-SR is based on
MPEG-4 part 2 video.
When I started to participate in the MPEG standards process in the
late '90s, things were languishing. There was little industry support
to do anything with the MPEG-4 standard, especially the very useful
tools for real time object based composition. I started an effort to
create a new profile for progressive video formats that eliminated
the need for most of the new IP used in the MPEG-2 standard. I was
getting some traction until the funding I was relying upon to
participate in the MPEG process was cut off. Shortly there after
Leonardo agreed to a codec shoot-out to determine if a new video
compression algorithm should be added to MPEG-4. This led to the
formation of Joint Video Team with the ITU, which led to the creation
of MPEG-4 part 10 and ITU H.264, aka AVC. Once again, the companies
holding most of the IP in MPEG-2 jumped in with both feet; it should
come as no surprise that they were able to add most of the interlaced
centric IP that they had created for MPEG-2 into the AVC standard.
Small wonder that Leonardo has been richly reward for his efforts as
the Chair for the MPEG standard efforts.
Perhaps in ten years we may be able to put this mess behind us and
finally eliminate the interlace footprint from SD and HD.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
- Follow-Ups:
- [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- From: Ron Economos
- References:
- [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- From: olho_avatar_i@xxxxxxxxxx
- [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- From: John Willkie
Other related posts:
- » [opendtv] A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- » [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- From: Ron Economos
- [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- From: olho_avatar_i@xxxxxxxxxx
- [opendtv] Re: A detail in the history of video standards
- From: John Willkie