190 likes | 196 Views
This article discusses the technical challenges and delivery format options for high quality video distribution, focusing on the use of MPEG-2. It also explores the offerings of the Research Channel, including live streaming and video-on-demand services. Additionally, it highlights the potential of MPEG-4 for better compression and video quality. Questions? Visit www.internet2.edu.
E N D
Spring 2002 Internet2 Member Meeting High Quality Video Distribution: Latest Technologies
Who we are • Steve Smith • University of Alaska • Egon Verharen • SURFnet • Andy Herron • University of Washington • Research Channel
“High Quality Video” • What we’re talking about: • “Video that is as good as or better than commercially broadcast video.”
Technical Challenges • What makes high quality video challenging: • Storage requirements • Network bandwidth • Client performance • Client complexity
Delivery Format Options • MPEG-2 • MPEG-4 • Proprietary (based on MPEG-4) • Windows Media • Real • Others
Why we choose MPEG-2 • Standards based • Used in video production • Wide variety of commercial products available • Good client rendering support • Software codecs for fast machines • Reasonably priced accelerator cards for slow machines • Reasonably efficient compression
Research Channel Offerings • MPEG-2 Multicast at 10 mbps • MPEG-2 V.O.D. at 5.6 mbps • HD-TV (MPEG2 HL) at 19.2 mbps • HD-TV (Sony HDCAM) at > 220 mbps
10 mbps MPEG-2 Live Stream • Research Channel live broadcast • Multicast for efficient use of bandwidth • Amnis (aka Optivision) set top boxes • NAC 3000 & NAC 4000 • Easy to setup and maintain • Quite stable if network not congested • Converts from NTSC to PAL if required • Each channel needs dedicated sender • Software client available
5.6 mbps MPEG-2 Video On Demand • IBM Video Charger servers • Streams on Isilon NAS farm (1.5 terabytes per box ) • NAS allows all streaming servers to access the same content. Disk space is shared across streaming servers. • NAS has lower throughput than SAN due to Windows SMB client • Roughly 40 megabytes/minute storage • Protocol is RTSP with UDP delivery • Linux and Mac clients in the works by IBM
5.6 mbps MPEG-2 Video On Demand (continued) • IBM Video Charger client • Software decode • PC DVD players include MPEG-2 decoder • Shareware Elecard software decoder available at www.elecard.com (use v1.35) • Hardware decode • Netstream 2000 • Sigma Designs X-Card (can render in 1080i)
19.2 mbps MPEG-2 HD-TV Video On Demand • Content is encoded as ATSC compliant HDTV transport stream at 19.2 mbps • Same Video Charger server backend as 5.6 mbps content • Low load on server when sending (~ 4% CPU on 1.1 Ghz PIII ) • Roughly 142 megabytes/minute storage
19.2 mbps MPEG-2 Client Options • Hardware HD tuner cards can be used • Telemann HiPix DTV-200 • Macro Image Technology MDP-100 • Hauppauge WinTV-HD • Severe problems when used as decoders but will mature • Software decode requires *fast* PC • 2.8 Ghz P4 with 1066 RDRAM barely does the job • Should get easier over time with 8x AGP, 3+ Ghz P4 • Have not tried multiprocessor system yet
19.2 mbps MPEG-2 HD Client • Over time : • Hardware decoders will mature allowing current PCs to display HD • Processors will get faster to support software decode of HD
HD-TV at 220 mbps • Sony proprietary HDCAM format • Production quality video (1080 60i 30fps) • Loss-less compression of data on HD tape • Audio/Video data rate is ~155 mbps on tape
HDCAM over the Internet • HD tape deck out via SDTI (270 mbps) to PC-based Optibase VideoPump card • Data transferred to server’s striped disk volume • On demand sent over the net at 220 mbps • Receiver PC passes data to Sony HDCAM decoder via VideoPump card in SDTI format. • Decoder then renders signal to analog audio/video signal
HDCAM over the Internet • Roughly 1.65 gigabytes/minute storage • Rather expensive equipment required • May be some time before Gig-Ethernet to the desktop is a reality • 19.2 MPEG-2 encoded HD is more practical
MPEG-4 Challenges and Opportunities • Better compression than MPEG-2 • Better video at same bandwidth • Less bandwidth at same video quality • More computing power required • Client capable of decoding MPEG-2 5.6 in software may have problems decoding MPEG-4 at equivalent video quality • Accelerator cards will solve this problem • Lack of MPEG-4 HD encoders • MPEG-4 per-stream royalty