Slashdot Mirror
MXF+JPEG-2000+HDD = Future of Video Preservation?
Anonymous Archivist writes "Media Matters, a technical consultancy specializing in archival audio and video material, recently completed a Mellon Foundation funded Digital Video Reformatting Preservation Project for the Dance Heritage Coalition. They conclude that MXF is the recommended container format, JPEG-2000 is the recommended encoding format and HDD is the recommended storage media. It's a very valuable series of experiments and offers a strong indication of where the archival preservation of analogue video is heading."
JPEG standart defines several encoding formats, which include lossless compression as well
" The Material eXchange Format (MXF) is an open file format targeted at the interchange of audio-visual material with associated data and metadata. It has been designed and implemented with the aim of improving file based interoperability between servers, workstations and other content creation devices. These improvements should result in improved workflows and result in more efficient working than is possible with today's mixed and proprietary file formats." -- What is MXF
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Why would they go with a compression format that doesn't do inter-frame compression?
It might be nice for editing, but you could get more quality in the same space with something like h264, or even h263 if they have to do this right now (i.e. before h264 is quite ready for prime time).
Recommended Storage Media: Peer to Peer network.
The HDD recommendation doesn't seem to make much sense. The article talks about cost-per-gigabyte, but obviously it is much cheaper to use CDRs or DVDRs. This is video preservation, after all, not storing indefinitely for video /editing/, which would require a more malleable storage medium.
And before someone points out that there are studies showing that the longevity of CDR/DVDR discs is questionable, surely proper storage of discs (and not buying the Best Buy free-after-rebate special) would be sufficient. HDD, after all, is susceptible to head crashes, and being a magnetic medium can be more easily overwritten.
SELECT quote.text AS sig FROM quote NATURAL JOIN attribute WHERE attribute.description = 'witty';
0 rows returned
make their report available on a format other than a '.doc' file. it is known to change a lot and therefore not suitable for long term storage.
OK, let's talk archiveability. Let's talk about a medium that you can leave in a shoebox for a hundred years and read just by shining a light through it. I'm not talking hypothetical here - this technology is proven by the fact that people used it a hundred years ago and it worked. And the technology is even better now, even more stable.
I am of course talking about film. It is very very easy now to write digital images onto film, not very much more difficult than it is to scan film. There's no need to worry about whether the file format will be supported in the future, as I've already said. You don't need to shovel money into vendor's pockets every few years just to copy it to the latest trendiest type of disc. You can build a machine to project film out of junk if you need to, or you can scan it if you want a digital image and when you have a better scanner (e.g. a higher DMax), you can just scan it again.
The dude who wrote this report is just blowing smoke. He's trying to sell snake oil.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36351 (no link for obvious reasons) is the bug report, which has been around since April 2000 but has not progressed much due to licensing issues (copyright ones fixed, patent ones not?).
Ummm what about the sound?!
Were that I say, pancakes?
Avoiding inter-frame compression means that, if you have some small amount of data corruption, you only get one, maybe two corrupted frames of video.
When there isn't patent litigation surrounding the format.
...had a guide on capturing analog video, said to be the part of a 3 part series, going over each capturing, cleaning, and compressing. Only part I ever came out - Ars do you read slashdot? - I am waiting on the last guides for some advice on how to preserve these rotting home VHS tapes.
Meanwhile, does anyone else have advice on capturing and cleaning video since we are already talking about compression? What settings are good for capturing and what sort of software exists to clean up VHS and give it the appearance of more clarity? I am using a WinTV card as Ars recommended it.
There will always be multiple backup solutions, but the biggest trend continues to be towards using hard disks for backup. When your data files are enormous (such as with audio/visual data), HDD backup is even more attractive.
MXF is the new, proprietary video compression method jointly sponsored by Microsoft and MTV. The new Most eXtreme Format is the video compression of choice for today's most hard-core, edgy, in-your-face artists with an attitude!
Ashlee Simpson says "When I'm performing for a half-time show of 10,000 screaming fans, I want to make sure that every bit of the live energy is caught perfectly! I give 100% for my fans and want to make sure they get every bit of my performance!"
MXF... in your FACE, Quicktime! This isn't your father's archive-quality lossless video compression algorithm!
(and keep an eye out for Ogg Vorbis 2 - by Mountain Dew!)
All this is is a method to line some guy's pockets. I'm sure the tape guys are gonna say, use XYZ type of tape. The disk guys are gonna say disk.
What makes this guy think that the interface to the HDD is going to be around in X years?
PC's have only had two dead (non-(e)IDE/ATA) interfaces, the ESDI and the ST506/ST-412 interfaces.
But what if you were trying to find a computer with IPI (1960s mainframe) interface.
The Fed gov't has this problem with trying to find parts for their old 8/9track tape drives..
Here's a good list of all the HDD interfaces over the years: http://www.i-t-s.com/corporate/terms.html
Stick with microfiche, film, that way we don't have to pay some vendor $$$/yr to keep alive a dead technology or pay some other vendor $$$/media to move them from old to new media.
For whatever reason (I'm not a video expert) many people prefer intraframe codecs for archival. As you probably guessed, Motion JPEG 2000 just treats each video frame as a still image and compresses it with JPEG 2000.
Dirac will give much better compression that JPEG 2000, but it also introduces the possibility of interframe artifacts.
indeed, lossless for archival preservation is the
only way, as it fits the basic rule of art restoration
technology -- never apply "improvements" which
cannot be reversibly undone to take advantage
of future science.
ironically then, the lossless format doesn't matter.
however, at least for the instant case of dance video,
the likely input (a myriad of digital tape formats)
is hopelessly neanderthal -- anything having to do with DV,
or MPEG, or even ATSC HDTV already tosses away much
color information. (4:1:1, 4:2:0, and 4:2:2 colorspace is embarrassing
to preserve "losslessly".) ditto for temporal
info, with interlacing being the culprit. even film at
24fps just will not cut it for motion such as dance.
so here's to better camera technology, whether it's
10- or 12-bit 4:4:4 RGB, or something like
carver mead's foveon made swift.