The latest reference software of HEVC Test Model (HM-1.0) was released at svn servers under the HM-1.0 tag. The repository URL for HM-1.0 is https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/svn/svn_TMuCSoftware/tags/HM-1.0.

HM-1.0 is significantly different from the previous versions of TMuC in that a lot of code implementing things that are not part of the HM design has been removed. As a result, the size of the code base shrunk by about half. 

In addition, the first working draft (WD1) of HEVC HM text is also available as document C403 at JCT-VC Document Management System.

Tools adopted in HM0.9 include 12-tap DCT-based interpolation filter (high efficiency configuration) and 6-tap directional interpolation filter (low complexity configuration) for 1/4 luma sample, bilinear interpolation filter for 1/8 chroma sample (both HE and LC), advanced motion vector prediction, bi-direction rounding control, bi-directional prediction for temporal level 0.

Motion compensation is the key factor for high efficient video compressing, where fractional pel accuracy requir[......]

Read More...

In current HM, unified intra prediction provides up to 34 directional prediction modes for different PUs. With the PU size of 4×4, 8×8, 16×16, 32×32, 64×64, there are 17, 34, 34, 34, and 5 prediction modes available respectively. The prediction directions in the unified intra prediction have the angles of +/- [0, 2, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 26, 32]/32. The angle is given by displacement of the bottom row of the PU and the reference row above the PU in case of vertical prediction, or displacement of the rightmost column of the PU and the reference column left from the PU in case of horizontal prediction. Figure 1 shows an example of prediction directions for 32×32 block size. Instead of different accuracy for different sizes, the reconstruction of the pixel uses the linear interpolation of the reference top or left samples at 1/32th pixel accuracy for all block size.

Figure 1. Available prediction directions in the unified intra prediction

Two arrays of reference samples are used in the unified intra prediction, corresponding to the row of samples lying above the current PU to be predicted, and the column of samples lying to the left of the same PU. Given a dominant prediction direction (horizontal or vertical), one of the reference arrays is defined to be the main array and the other array the side array. In the case of vertical prediction, the reference row above the PU is called the main array and the reference column to the left of the same PU is called the side array. In the case of horizontal prediction, the reference column to the left of the PU is called the main array and the reference row above the PU is called the side array.

When the intra prediction angle is positive, blue lines in Figure 1, only the samples from the main array are used for prediction. When the intra prediction angle is negative, red lines in Figure 1, a per-sample test should be performed to determine whether samples from the main or the side array should be used for prediction, as shown in Figure 2 (a). Additionally when the side array is used, the computation of the index into the side array requires a division operation. In order to remove the division operation, the lookup-table (LUT) technique is used for the negative angular prediction process in the calculation of the y-intercept in the case of vertical prediction or the x-intercept in the case of horizontal prediction. Normally, the integer and fractional parts of the intercept between are calculated using the following equations respectively:

deltaIntSide = (256*32*(l+1)/absAng)>>8

deltaFractSide = (256*32*(l+1)/absAng)%256

where absAng is the absolute value of intra prediction angle (=[ 2,    5,   9,  13,  17,  21,  26,  32]) and l is x/y pixel location for vertical/horizontal prediction. With LUT technique, the above equations can be replaced with the following equations:

deltaIntSide = (invAbsAngTable[absAngIndex]*(l+1))>>8

deltaFractSide = (invAbsAngTable[absAngIndex]*(l+1))%256

where invAbsAngTable = [4096, 1638, 910, 630, 482, 390, 315, 256]. By using LUT, there is no division operation during the computation of the index into the side array. However, there still exists the per-sample test to determine the main or the side array for prediction. To simplify this process, the main array is extended by projecting samples from the side array onto it according to the prediction direction, as shown in Figure 2 (b). During the projection, the fractional part of the intercept is omitted and the intercept is rounded to the nearest integer:

deltaInteger = (invAbsAngTable[absAngIndex]*(l+1)+128)>>8

Finally, the prediction process only uses the extended main array and the same simple linear interpolation formula to predict all samples in the PU. Figure 2 shows an example of simplified intra prediction with direction angle VER-8.

Figure 2. An example of simplified intra prediction with direction angle VER-8

When DC mode is used in the intra prediction, the mean value of samples from both top row and left column is used for the DC prediction.

Table 1 summarizes the physical and logical mode indexes used in the bitstream and prediction functions respectively. Depending on the PU size, different numbers of prediction modes are available respectively, as listed in Table 2.

 Table 1. Physical and logical mode indexes used in the bitstream and prediction functions respectively

[......]

Read More...

CU, the basic coding unit like the macroblock and sub-macroblock in H.264/AVC, can have various sizes but is restricted to be a square shape. Given the size and hierarchical depth of LCU, CU can be expressed in a recursive quadtree representation adapted to the picture. Figure 1 (b) shows maximum possible recursive CU structure in HM (LCU size = 64 and hierarchical depth = 4). In HM, the coding unit tree structure is limited from 8×8 to 64×[......]

Read More...

Table 1. Structure of tools forming the high efficiency and low complexity configurations of the HM

Read More...

• The first JCT meeting will be held on 15-23 April, 2010
• AhGs will meet on 18 April, 2010
• The 92nd MPEG meeting will be held on 19-23 April, 2010

All meetings will take place in the art’otel dresden. The official web site is accessible now at http://mpeg.tnt.uni-hannover.de/.

The plan of next eight MPEG meetings  (from 92nd to 102nd) is listed as follows:

Keep updating on the plan of MPEG meetings!

During the 39th VCEG and 91st MPEG meeting held in Kyoto, Japan on January 17-22, 2010, the call for proposals (CfP) on video compression technology (H.NGVC/HVC) will be finally issued jointly by ITU-T SG16 Q.6 (VCEG) and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 (MPEG) on January 22, 2010. A Joint Collaborative Team (JCT) on Video Coding Standard Development will also be established accordingly between VCEG and MPEG.

Some minor modifications to draft CfP issued in November 2009 are made. The modifications involve the timeline, test conditions and test fees, etc., as follows:

• Timeline

The timeline of the Call for Proposals is changed:

2010/01/22:                 Final Call for Proposals.
2010/01/22:                 For[......]

Read More...

The official web site is accessible now at http://mpeg.espalier.co.jp/, and the registration information is listed as follows:
Delegates are requested to contribute a Facilities fee of JPY 40,000 (about US$400) before or on 2009-12-05.
Delegates who register after 2009-12-05 will be charged JPY 50,000.
Mandatory document handling fee (for the WG 11 meeting website management): JPY 2,000.

• the need of sufficient time to finalize the establishment of collaborative team with VCEG and only then issue a joint CfP;
• the need of sufficient time to determine the cost of the subjective evaluation tests after the CfP is finalized;
• the need of sufficient time to refine the CfP test conditions/materials and only then generate the proposed bitstreams;
• the need of sufficient time to define the complexity evaluation criterion in an objective method for quantitative analysis,
• the need of sufficient time to perform the subjective evaluation tests but currently planned in the year-end holidays period.

This recommendation aroused controversy between the delegates of national bodies and the convenor,[......]

Read More...