On Executable Versus MP4 - Quality of Playback

[Lin Evans]

A recent thread:

http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=11591&view=getnewpost?

has, among other issues, raised the question of whether or not there is a qualitative difference between MP4 h.264 at 1920 x 1080 pixels progressive and either MacIntosh or Windows executable of the same slideshow. The inescapable answer is "yes" there is a significant quality difference depending on the content, complexity and type of animation in the show. Let's put an end to this question which seems to periodically crop up when users notice no apparent differences between the MP4 and the executable formats. There "is" a difference folks. It may or may not become apparent depending on your resources and the type of show, but it is a very real difference.

Many may not always see these differences, but if a significantly complex animation with a number of objects is created then played back on a system with sufficient resources to properly execute the slideshow, the differences are night and day in terms of smoothness of the playback. It doesn't matter whether the mp4 show is played back on a true BluRay disc, on an AVCHD, memory stick, Western Digital (or similar) device via a high speed HDMI cable or on a computer with unlimited resources, the differences are significant.

If your slideshow consists of only normal sized images ( perhaps 1600x1200 or smaller) with some pan, zooms and rotates with transitions between slides, you may find that there is no perceptible difference between the Mac or PC executable and the MP4 h.264 or a BluRay or AVCHD created from the MP4. On the other hand, if you have lots of objects and significant complex animations, the differences will be immediate and very apparent.

To demonstrate this, just play back my demo show "Alley Cat" which I have linked below. There are links to the MP4 h.264, the MacIntosh native executable and the Windows Executable. If you wish to see the differences, download the MP4 h.264 and your choice of the executable files and try it for yourself.

Windows Link (about 8 meg)

MacIntosh Link (about 8 meg)

MP4 h.264 Link (about 48 meg)

Lin

[goddi]

A recent thread:

http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=11591&view=getnewpost?

has, among other issues, raised the question of whether or not there is a qualitative difference between MP4 h.264 at 1920 x 1080 pixels progressive and either MacIntosh or Windows executable of the same slideshow. The inescapable answer is "yes" there is a significant quality difference depending on the content, complexity and type of animation in the show. Let's put an end to this question which seems to periodically crop up when users notice no apparent differences between the MP4 and the executable formats. There "is" a difference folks. It may or may not become apparent depending on your resources and the type of show, but it is a very real difference......

Lin

======================

Greetings Lin,

I put your Alley Cat shows on a memory stick and brought it to my computer store. I compared the MP4 format and the Mac format. I did see a difference. The Mac format was smoother. The MP4 was good but in comparison to the Mac, I could detect a perceptible difference; the MP4 was not as smooth. (I played it on a 2GB Ram, 2.26GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Processor MacBook). My PTE shows are not as complex as your Ally Cat so I have not detected any difference with them. But this is good to know and understand. But I hope Igor will sort out the problem with the Wav files causing a problem in the Mac format, if it can be done.

Thanks for the demo.

Gary

[potwnc]

Lin,

Can you upload versions of the mp4 at NTSC and PAL framerates?

[Lin Evans]

Hi Ray,

You mean as an AVI? Or do you mean using the custom controls to give 30fps and 25fps? The actual 29.97 isn't an option but perhaps 30 fps is an approximation. I can create as 30fps and 25fps if that's what you prefer.

Best regards,

Lin

30 Frames Per Second Link

25 Frames Per Second Link

[potwnc]

Lin,

I meant as an mp4 - which is what you posted (at least the 30fps version. That's the only one I've downloaded since I'm in the US).

Strange thing, though, the 30fps version (which is actually NTSC, 29.97fps; in PTE as in many programs 30fps actually means 29.97 fps) is about 2.5 times the file size of the 24fps. Did you use a much higher bitrate for the 30fps version?

I'll post here soon as to my reason for my request.

Thanks!

Ray

[Lin Evans]

Hi Ray,

I used the default bit rates for audio and the Custom preset with 30 fps at 1920x1080 mode=1 pass, quality = 100, and used the same for the 25 fps. The size differences between the 30 and 25 fps version were about as expected considering the five fewer frames on the 25 for each second of playback. The original one I posted the link to was created as a 1080p for Vimeo using the only settings available. I don't know why it was so much smaller than the "custom" versions at 30 and 25 fps but I uploaded trials of the default as well as the 30 fps to Vimeo and there was no visible difference in their on-screen appearance or their performance. Of course they are converted to Flash by Vimeo and I don't know whether Vimeo changes video bitrates to make all HD videos equal or not. I've also tried the same show on Youtube with similar results.

I made an AVCHD using the default version which was created using whatever Igor has programmed as defaults for 1080p and played it on my BluRay player with my Samsung 40" LED TV via a high speed HDMI cable and the playback was not really smooth. Likewise for the computer. I played the 30 fps version and the Vimeo version of the mp4 over my computer and it was essentially identical to the AVCHD on the Samsung. None were nearly as smooth as the executable version. The "image quality" was about identical to the executable, but the playback was not smooth. I have made numerous other AVCHD's lately, some with complex animations and some with just jpgs with minimal pans, zooms, rotates, etc., and they played virtually identical to executables of the same shows. I can only conclude that mp4 h.264 simply can't handle complex animations such as the ones in my demo. If there were an issue with resources or video card (both are sufficient in my case) then I'm assuiming it would also appear in the executable. There could be issues with bitrates, but Video Maker doesn't, as far as I can determine, allow any changes to video bitrate when producing an mp4 h.264. The only bitrate adjustments allowed are to the audio as far as I can determine.

That's why I wondered if you meant creating an AVI and then converting that to mp4 h.264 because with AVI there are variable bitrates available as I remember.

Best regards,

Lin

Lin,

I meant as an mp4 - which is what you posted (at least the 30fps version. That's the only one I've downloaded since I'm in the US).

Strange thing, though, the 30fps version (which is actually NTSC, 29.97fps; in PTE as in many programs 30fps actually means 29.97 fps) is about 2.5 times the file size of the 24fps. Did you use a much higher bitrate for the 30fps version?

I'll post here soon as to my reason for my request.

Thanks!

Ray

[potwnc]

The reason I wanted a 30fps version is because that is the refresh rate of my monitor (and for those in PAL countries their monitor refresh rate is 25fps). Playing a 24fps video on a monitor that doesn't refresh at 24fps (there are a few of these monitors but they're very expensive) can't really be compared with playing a PTE .exe because the PTE playback engine will automatically refresh at the monitor's refresh rate.

Personally when I play the 30fps mp4 file I don't see that much inferior quality than when I play the .exe file. And to really compare apples with apples any mp4 at 1920x1080 should be rendered at the 25Mbps bitrate that the best current playback technology (i.e., Blu-ray) can support.

That said I have a pretty powerful system so probably most people will not get the same quality on the mp4 playback that I do.

I don't believe there's anything fundamental about h264 that would make it incapable of handling animations that are complex to set up in PTE (or any other software). At the encoding stage a lot depends on the exact configuration of the h264 parameters used (which are so complex a person could write 5 Ph.D. theses about it!). At the decoding stage a lot depends on the power of one's PC components.

About 2 years from now many people will have PCs (or Macs) where 16 or more CPU cores are considered average, applications will be 64-bit, memory in a good video PC will be 16GB of RAM minimum, video cards will have 4GB of RAM and hard drives will be capable of delivering 12Gbps. When that time comes I think whatever the video encoding standard is (and I believe it will still be h264) we should see no improvement of .exe over the equivalent video.

Of course if I'm wrong I can come back and edit this post :-)

Ray

[Lin Evans]

Hi Ray,

I suspect that the difference is sixty plus frames per second versus thirty frames per second. I recently (several months) installed a forty inch Samsung LED 1080p television and have played the samples back in both executable format and all manner of mp4 h.264 formats which I've been able to create and output using both USB memory stick and by connecting directly to my development system via high speed hdmi cable. I can still see a clear difference in motion smoothness between the executable and mp4 h.264 version in the outputs at 1080 x 1920.

It seems logical (though perhaps I'm missing something) that my system is sufficient to produce optimal output on the mp4 since it plays the executable flawlessly and at a much higher frame rate.

Unfortunately, I don't have a BluRay burner so can only use AVCHD to test output on my Samsung BluRay player and as you have mentioned, that bitrate is quite inferior to BluRay. I share you enthusiasm for the future, but for now, I just don't believe that h.264 in its current configuration is up to handling the very complex animations smoothly. Having said this, however, I'm perplexed as to why we are seeing what amount to significant differences in output and wondering what part the system configuration might play if any?

The question, I suppose, is why would a computer system and video card which is capable of rendering perfectly smooth animations on this sample with executable output at over 60 frames per second not be also capable of rendering an mp4 h.264 at half that frame rate smoothly? Perhaps there are system differences which prevent smooth "playback" of a properly rendered h.264? The actual rendering process should be actually a slam dunk for such a system, so the playback seems to be the problematic area. I fully understand why my AVCHD would not be smooth because of inferior media constrained bitrate, but when the direct playback via high speed hdmi cable using the same video card which produced the rendering is inferior, then there would appear to be other variables at play. Perhaps someone with both a BluRay burner and a powerful video card can burn the h.264 to BluRay and report back on the results played on a good 1080p television. It would be interesting to try to get to the bottom of this dilemma and perhaps then be able to prepare documentation so PTE users can know what to expect.

Best regards,

Lin

The reason I wanted a 30fps version is because that is the refresh rate of my monitor (and for those in PAL countries their monitor refresh rate is 25fps). Playing a 24fps video on a monitor that doesn't refresh at 24fps (there are a few of these monitors but they're very expensive) can't really be compared with playing a PTE .exe because the PTE playback engine will automatically refresh at the monitor's refresh rate.

Personally when I play the 30fps mp4 file I don't see that much inferior quality than when I play the .exe file. And to really compare apples with apples any mp4 at 1920x1080 should be rendered at the 25Mbps bitrate that the best current playback technology (i.e., Blu-ray) can support.

That said I have a pretty powerful system so probably most people will not get the same quality on the mp4 playback that I do.

I don't believe there's anything fundamental about h264 that would make it incapable of handling animations that are complex to set up in PTE (or any other software). At the encoding stage a lot depends on the exact configuration of the h264 parameters used (which are so complex a person could write 5 Ph.D. theses about it!). At the decoding stage a lot depends on the power of one's PC components.

About 2 years from now many people will have PCs (or Macs) where 16 or more CPU cores are considered average, applications will be 64-bit, memory in a good video PC will be 16GB of RAM minimum, video cards will have 4GB of RAM and hard drives will be capable of delivering 12Gbps. When that time comes I think whatever the video encoding standard is (and I believe it will still be h264) we should see no improvement of .exe over the equivalent video.

Of course if I'm wrong I can come back and edit this post :-)

Ray

[Carol Steele]

.......................Perhaps someone with both a BluRay burner and a powerful video card can burn the h.264 to BluRay and report back on the results played on a good 1080p television. It would be interesting to try to get to the bottom of this dilemma and perhaps then be able to prepare documentation so PTE users can know what to expect.

Well I done just that for you Lin

Here's what I did:

1. Downloaded the 25 fps file
   
2. Brought it into Pinnacle Studio 14 for blu-ray authoring
   
3. Output as a blu-ray disc structured folder (so that all the folder structures were correct for Blu-ray playback
   
4. Created ISO image file
   
5. Burnt ISO image to Blu-ray disk
   
6. Played back to my 46"Panny G15 via my Panny BD60 Blu-ray player
   

The animations were just as smooth and fluid as when it was played back on my computer (specs below) - but (there's always a 'but' isn't there ), the edges of the cube were showing 'jaggies' which were a lot more apparent than when the mp4 file was played back on the computer via Windows Media Player.

[Lin Evans]

Hi Carol,

Thanks! That answers lots of questions. So the issue with smoothness is quite probably directly related to bitrate as Ray suspected. What isn't yet clear is why playing the mp4 h.264 directly via a high speed hdmi cable results in less smoothness than after conversion to BluRay. It perhaps means that the system playing back the h.264 can handle real time rendering and display even at 60 or greater frames per second better than it can display 25 frames per second of video from an h.264 file. This may have implications about the h.264 encoding.

The increased jaggies on the BluRay can likely be explained by the great differences in frame rate between the executable and 25 fps rate of the BluRay. As the image moves, being refreshed at over double the rate probably fills in the "gaps" left by the lower frame pulse rate.

What we then need with PTE in the future is the ability to directly burn to BluRay and perhaps something which Igor has been working on for some time now, a leading edge blur for video display. With time we can probably equate video with real-time rendering.

As a side note, I am also testing the freeware MakeInstantPlayer which transforms video into executable format. I've noticed that when I convert the mp4 h.264 in question from video back to executable, the playback is much smoother than with the h.264. It's not as good as the original executable - it still has micro "jumps" rather than completely smooth rotations, etc., but it is visibly better than the h.264 it's derived from.

Here's a link if you would like to try this converter:

http://download.cnet.com/MakeInstantPlayer/3000-2064_4-10759598.html

Best regards,

Lin

Well I done just that for you Lin

Here's what I did:

1. Downloaded the 25 fps file
2. Brought it into Pinnacle Studio 14 for blu-ray authoring
3. Output as a blu-ray disc structured folder (so that all the folder structures were correct for Blu-ray playback
4. Created ISO image file
5. Burnt ISO image to Blu-ray disk
6. Played back to my 46"Panny G15 via my Panny BD60 Blu-ray player

The animations were just as smooth and fluid as when it was played back on my computer (specs below) - but (there's always a 'but' isn't there ), the edges of the cube were showing 'jaggies' which were a lot more apparent than when the mp4 file was played back on the computer via Windows Media Player.