Advertisement

Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 78, Issue 22, pp 31733–31755 | Cite as

Impact of packet loss on 4K UHD video for portable devices

  • Anthony O. Adeyemi-Ejeye
  • Mohammed Alreshoodi
  • Laith Al-Jobouri
  • Martin FleuryEmail author
Article
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

Ultra High Definition (UHD) video streaming to portable devices has become topical. Two standardized codecs are current, H.264/Advanced Video Coding (AVC) and the more recent High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC). This paper compares the two codecs’ robustness to packet loss, after making allowances for relative coding gain. A significant finding from the comparison is that the H.264/AVC codec is less impacted by packet loss than HEVC, despite their differing coding efficiencies and including at low levels of packet loss. The results will be especially relevant to those designing portable devices with 4K UHD video display capability, allowing them to estimate the level of error concealment necessary. The paper also includes the results of HEVC compressed UHD video streaming over an IEEE 802.11ad wireless link operating at 60 GHz as a pointer to future performance in an error-prone channel.

Keywords

4K UHD H.264/AVC HEVC IEEE 802.ad Packet loss visibility 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Abe A, Walker SD (2016) Multi-hop 802.11ad wireless H.264 video streaming. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Telecomms. and Sig. Proc., p 94–99Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adeyemi-Ejeye AO, Alreshoodi M, Al-Jobouri L, Fleury M (2019) Prospects for live higher resolution video streaming to mobile devices: achievable quality across wireless links. J Real-Time Image Proc 16(1):127–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Akyazi P, Ebrahimi T (2018) Comparison of compression efficiency between HEVC/H.265, VP9 and AV1 based on subjective quality assessments. In Proc. of IEEE 10th Int. Conf. on Quality of Multimedia ExperienceGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alreshoodi M, Adeyemi-Ejeye A, Al-Jobouri L, Fleury M, Woods JC (2017) Packet loss visibility for higher resolution video on portable devices. In Proc. of the IEEE Conf. on Consumer Electron., p 237–238Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Argyropoulos S, Raake A, Garcia M-N, List P (2011) No-reference bit stream model for video quality assessment of H.264/AVC video based on packet loss visibility. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Process., p 1169–1172Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bae S-H, Kim J, Kim M, Cho S e a (2013) Assessments of subjective video quality on HEVC-encoded 4K-UHD video for beyond-HDTV broadcasting services. IEEE Trans Broadcast 59(2):209–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Blender-Foundation (2011) Sintel 4k. URL http://www.sintel.org/news/sintel-4k-version-available. Accessed July
  8. 8.
    Boulos F, Parrein B, Le Callet P, Hands D (2009) Perceptual effects of packet loss on H.264/AVC encoded videos. In Proc. of the 4th Int. Workshop Video Process and Quality Metrics for Consumer Electron., p 1–7Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cermak G (2009) Subjective video quality as a function of bitrate, frame rate, packet loss rate and codec. In Proc. of the 1st Int. Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience, p 41–46Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chan A, Zeng K, Mohapatra P, Lee S, Banerjee S (2010) Metrics for evaluating video streaming quality in lossy IEEE 802.11 wireless networks. In Proc. of the IEEE INFOCOM, pp. 1–9Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chang Y-L, Reznik YA, Chen Z, Cosman PC (2013) Motion compensated error concealment for HEVC based on block-merging and residual energy. In Proc. of 20th Int. Packet Video Workshop, pp. 1–6Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cheon M, Lee J-S (2018) Subjective and objective quality assessment of compressed 4K UHD videos for immersive experience. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 28(7)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cordeiro C (2009) Evaluation of medium access technologies for next generation millimeter-wave WLAN and WPAN. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. Workshops, p 1–5Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Emoto M, Sugawara M (2012) Critical fusion frequency for bright and wide field-of-view image display. J Disp Technol 8(7):424–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    Halák J, Krsek M, Ubik S, Žejdl P, Nevřela F (2011) Real-time long distance transfer of uncompressed 4K video for remote collaboration. Futur Gener Comput Syst 27(7):886–892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hamidouche W, Cocherel G, Le Feuvre J, Raulet M, Déforges O (2014) 4k real time video streaming with SHVC decoder and GPAC player. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Multimed. and Expo WorkshopsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    He Z, Cai J, Chen C (2002) Joint source channel rate-distortion analysis for adaptive mode selection and rate control in wireless video coding. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 12(6):511–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    International Telecommunications Union (2014) The present state of Ultrahigh Definition Television. Radiocommunication recommendation BT.2246-3Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kanamuri S, Cosman P, Reibman A, Vaishampayan V (2006) Modeling packet-loss visibility in MPEG-2 video. IEEE Trans Multimedia 8(2):341–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kanamuri S, Subramanian S, Cosman P, Reibman A (2006) Predicting, H.264 packet loss visibility using a generalized linear model. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. Image Process., p 2245–2248Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Khan A, Sun L, Ifeachor E (2012) QoE prediction model and its application in video quality adaptation over UMTS networks. IEEE Trans Multimedia 14(2):431–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim D-H, Kim Y-J, Choi K-H (2018) Motion-vector refinement for video error concealment using downhill simplex approach. ETRI J 40(2):266–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kim Y, Choi J-S, Kim M (2018) A real-time convolutional neural network for super-resolution on FPGA with applications to 4K UHD 60 fps video services. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. Video Technol. (Early Access)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Korhonen J, Wang Y (2005) Effect of packet size on loss rate and delay in wireless links. In Proc. of the IEEE Wireless Comms. and Network. Conf., p 241603–1608Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kulapana G, Talagala DS, Arachchi HK, Fernando A (2016) Error resilience aware motion estimation and mode selection for HEVC video transmission. In Proc. of IEEE Conf. on Consumer Electronics, p 85–86Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kumar R, Assunção P, Ferreira L, Navarro A (2018) Retargeting UHD 4k video for smartphones. in Proc. of IEEE 8th Int. Conf. on Consumer Electron. – BerlinGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kunić S, Šego Z (2013) Beyond HDTV technology. In Proc. of the 55th Int. Symp., p 83–87Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lee S, Kim H, Eum N (2016) Reduced complexity single core based HEVC video codec processor for mobile 4K-UHD applications. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Consumer Electron., p 94–95. Accessed July 2019Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Leppkes H (2014) LAV filters 0.62 [Online]. Available from https://github.com/Nevcairiel/LAVFilters/releases/tag/0.62. Accessed July
  31. 31.
    Li Z, Huang Y, Liu G, Wang F, Zhang Z-L, Dai Y (2012) Cloud transcoder: bridging the format and resolution gap between Internet video and mobile devices. In Proc. of the Int. Workshop on Network and Operating System Support for Digital Audio and Video, p 33–38Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liang Y, Apostolopoulos J, Girod B (2013) Analysis of packet loss for compressed video: does burst-length matter? In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust. Speech, and Signal Process., p 684–687Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lu C-H, Lin Y (2013) Robust error resilient H.264/AVC video coding. In Proc. of the IEEE TENCON, pp. 1–4Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    M. Mehendale, S. Das, M. Sharma, and M. Mody et al. (2012) A true multi-standard, programmable, low-power, full HD video-codec engine for smartphone HD SoC. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Solid State Conf., p 226–228Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Microsoft (2012) DirectShow. [Online] Available from http://msdn.microsoft.com/enus/library/windows/desktop/dd375454(v=vs.85).aspx
  36. 36.
    Mohamed S, Rubino G (2002) A study of real-time packet video quality using random neural nets. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 12(12):1071–1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Moorthy A, Seshadrinathan K, Soundarajan R, Bovik A (2010) Wireless video quality assessment: a study of subjective scores and subjective algorithms. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 20(4):513–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nallappan K, Gourboukha H, Nerguizian C, Skorobogatiy M (2018) Uncompressed HD and Ultra-HD video streaming using terahertz wireless communications. In Proc. of 11th Global Symp. on Millimeter WavesGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Nightingale J, Wang Q, Grecos C (2012) HEVStream: a framework for streaming and evaluation of high efficiency video coding (HEVC) content in loss-prone networks. IEEE Trans Consum Electron 58(2):404–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Nightingale J, Wang Q, Grecos C, Goma S (2014) The impact of network impairment on quality of experience (QoE) in H.265/HEVC video streaming. IEEE Trans Consum Electron 60(2):242–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nitsche T, Cordeiro C, Flores AB, Knightly EW, Perahia E, Widmer JC (2014) IEEE 802.11ad: directional 60 GHz communication for multi-Gbps Wi-fi. IEEE Commun Mag 52(12):132–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ohm J, Sullivan G, Schwarz H, Tan T, Wiegand T (2012) Comparison of the coding efficiency of video coding standards including high efficiency video coding (HEVC). IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 22(12):1669–1684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Oztas B, Pourazad MT, Nasiopoulos P, Leung VCM (2012) A study on the HEVC performance over lossy networks. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Elec., Circ. and Syst., p785–788Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Öztürk E, Zia W, Pauli V, Steinbach E (2018) Performance evaluation of ATSC 3.0 DASH over LTE eMBMS. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Symp. on BroadcastGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pal U, King HL (2018) Cost increase due to UHD video broadcasting compared to HD. SMPTE Motion Imaging J 127(10):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pinson M, Wolf S (2004) A new standardized method for objectively measuring video quality. IEEE Trans Broadcast 50(3):312–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Pinson MH, Wolf S, Cermak G (2010) HDTV subjective quality of H.264 vs. MPEG-2, with and without packet loss. IEEE Trans Broadcast 56(1):86–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Pourazad MT, Doutre C, Azimi M, Nasiopoulos B (2012) HEVC: the new gold standard for video compression: how does HEVC compare with H.264/AVC? IEEE Consum Electron Mag 1(3):36–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Poynton C (2003) Digital video and HDTV: algorithms and interfaces. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Rappaport TS, Heath RW Jr, Daniels CR, Murdock NJ (2014) Millimeter wave wireless communications. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Reibman A, Poole D (2007) Predicting packet-loss visibility using scene characteristics. In proc. of the 16th Int. Packet Video Workshop: 308–317Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Rerăbék M, Ebrahimi T (2014) Comparison of compression efficiency between HEVC/H.265 and VP9 based on subjective assessments. In Applications of digital image processing XXXVII, vol. 9217, no. EPFLCONF-200925. SPIE-Int Soc Optical EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Rerăbék M, Hanhart P, Korshunov P, Ebrahimi T (2015) Quality evaluation of HEVC and VP9 video compression in real-time applications. In proc. of IEEE 7th Int. Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience, p 1–6Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ryu E-S, Kim J (2015) Error concealment mode signalling for robust mobile video transmission. Int J Electron Commun 69:1070–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Salva-Garcia P, Alcaraz-Calero JM, Alaez RM, Chirivella-Perez E, Nightingale J, Wang Q (2018) 5G-UHD: design, prototyping and empirical evaluation of adaptive ultra-high-definition video streaming based on scalable H.265 in virtualised 5G networks. Comput Commun 118:171–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Schierl T, Hannuksela MM, Wang Y-K, Wenger S (2012) System layer integration of high efficiency video coding. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 22(12):1871–1884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Seufert M, Egger S, Slanina H, Zinner T, Hoβfeld T, Tran-Gia P (2015) A survey on quality of experience of HTTP adaptive streaming. IEEE Commun Surveys Tuts 17(1):469–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Shin J, Cosman PC (2010) Classification of MPEG-2 transport stream packet loss visibility. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. Acoustics speech and signal process, p 910–913Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Shirai D, Yamaguchi T, Shimizu T, Murooka T, Fujii T (2006) 4K SHD real-time video streaming system with JPEG 2000 parallel codec. In Proc of the IEEE Asia Pacific Conf on Circ and Syst, p 1855–1858Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Shirai D, Kawano T, Fujii T, Kaneko K, Ohta N, Ono S et al (2009) Real time switching and streaming transmission of uncompressed 4K motion pictures. Futur Gener Comput Syst 25(2):192–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Stockhammer T, Zia W (2007) Error-resilient coding and decoding strategies for video communication. In: Van der Schaar M, Chou PA (eds) Multimedia over IP and wireless networks. Academic, Burlington, pp 13–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Sugawara M, Choi S-Y, Woods D (2014) Ultra-high-definition television (Rec. ITU-R BT.2020): a generational leap in the evolution of television. IEEE Signal Process Mag 31(3):170–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Tan TK, Weerakkody R, Mrak M, Ramzan N, Baroncini V, Ohm J-R, Sullivan GJ (2016) Video quality evaluation methodology and verification testing of HEVC compression performance. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 26(1):76–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Valdes-Garcia A, Reynolds S, Natarajan A et al (2011) Single element and phased-array transceiver chipsets for 60-GHz Gb/s communications. IEEE Commun Mag 49(4):120–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    VQEG (2014) Final report from the video quality experts group on the validation of objective models of video quality assessment, phase ii. Available: from www.vqeg.org. Accessed July
  66. 66.
    Wang J, Zhang H (2012) Capacity on 60 GHz wireless communication system over fading channels. J Netw 7(1):203–209Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Wang Z, Bovik A, Sheikh H, Simoncelli E (2004) Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans Image Process 13(4):600–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wiegand T, Sullivan GJ, Bjøntegaard G, Luthra A (2003) Overview of the H.264/AVC video coding standard. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 13(7):560–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Winkler S, Mohandas P (2008) The evolution of video quality measurement: from PSNR to hybrid metrics. IEEE Trans Broadcast 54(3):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Wood D (2011) Beyond HDTV at ITU-R-EBU Tech.-i 10Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Wu N, Wen M, Su H, Ren J, Zhang C (2012) A parallel H.264 encoder with CUDA: mapping and evaluation. IEEE 18th Int Conf Parallel Distrib Syst 276–283Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Innovative Media Laboratory, Department of Music and MediaUniversity of SurreyGuildfordUK
  2. 2.University CollegeQassim UniversityBuraydahSaudi Arabia
  3. 3.School of Science, Technology, and EngineeringUniversity of SuffolkIpswichUK

Personalised recommendations