Emby 4k hdr streaming

[Guest asrequested]

That's a great idea! Do now my obstacle would be how to re-encode a UHD HDR file to HD SDR? Not an easy task as I've read. 

 

No it isn't. Here's what you're looking at;

 

 

The fps started at 40, and it keeps dropping. And it isn't tone mapping. mpv, can encode movies and has the ability to tone map, but I haven't got around to trying it. Either way, you'll need a big CPU or good GPU. And be patient

[AmericanCrisis 28]

That's promising! So it is possible? 

[Guest asrequested]

That's promising! So it is possible? 

 

Depending on whether you have HDR or not. That's the tricky part. 

[pir8radio 1292]

@  I'm still considering getting a good nvidia card for multi stream transcoding.   But I'm trying to figure out before i spend a crap ton of money on a good GPU, whether or not i should just get another CPU...  So i was curious what kind of FPS you are seeing on different videos using hw transcoding, as well as maybe the capability of your gpu if you do any of that... or anyone else for that matter..      My xeon is just keeping up with 4k content at times.

Looking into a P6000 or P2000    hum not sure why the first @ didn't tag you.. lets try again.

 

Video

Title4K HEVC

CodecHEVC

ProfileMain 10

Level153

Resolution3840x2160

Aspect ratio16:9

AnamorphicNo

InterlacedNo

Framerate23.9760246

Bitrate54862 kbps

Video rangeHDR

Color primariesbt2020

Color spacebt2020nc

Color transfersmpte2084

Pixel formatyuv420p10le

Ref frames1

Edited September 23, 2018 by pir8radio

[Guest asrequested]

My Ryzen Threadripper 1920X has no trouble transcoding 4k. But you need to keep in mind that HDR tone mapping is not imminent. If you're not concerned with the HDR and are only transcoding SDR 4k, how many are you planning on doing, simultaneously? Either way, the best option is CPU (if you can afford it). If HDR is an issue (from your post, it seems so), then just add the 1080 version and use multi-versioning.

 

I really need to get around to testing mpv transcoding. It should get the job done, as it has the tone mapping algorithms.

[pir8radio 1292]

My Ryzen Threadripper 1920X has no trouble transcoding 4k. But you need to keep in mind that HDR tone mapping is not imminent. If you're not concerned with the HDR and are only transcoding SDR 4k, how many are you planning on doing, simultaneously? Either way, the best option is CPU (if you can afford it). If HDR is an issue (from your post, it seems so), then just add the 1080 version and use multi-versioning.

 

I really need to get around to testing mpv transcoding. It should get the job done, as it has the tone mapping algorithms.

 

Im looking at pure FPS's  what are you seeing using hw transcoding on 1080p type content and 4k content?    Right now depending on content im only seeing like 60 fps on most transcoding tasks, with 4k in the 20-30's.      

 

I dont care much about HDR when transcoding, any high end playback will be directplay.

 

I ask about the gpu because a second xenon for my server is like 900 bucks,  but a p6000 is 1k-6k   If i see CPU FPS's in the 60's now i would expect to see 120-140 with a second cpu...  but if an nvidia P6000 gets me like 600 fps then its a no brainier.  I can support multiple streams without eating into my cpu.

Edited September 23, 2018 by pir8radio

[PenkethBoy 2063]

From a quick google - the P2000 can do multiple 4k transcodes at once with lowish cpu % - caveat on things posted on the internet applies Obviously  

 

and is a lot cheaper than a new xeon or the p6000

[Guest asrequested]

The problem with hwa is that you run the risk of it not actually working, or not optimized to be working well. It can change based on driver and/or ffmpeg build. Software transcoding always works. And without the HDR, it will look horrible.

[Guest asrequested]

My CPU transcodes 4k at 70fps. And usage looks like this

 

https://emby.media/community/index.php?/topic/56343-10-simultaneous-full-transcodes/?p=548573

Edited September 23, 2018 by Doofus

[pir8radio 1292]

My CPU transcodes 4k at 70fps. And usage looks like this

 

https://emby.media/community/index.php?/topic/56343-10-simultaneous-full-transcodes/?p=548573

 

ahh so no hardware transcoding for you?   anyone have something that shows how many FPS your GPU gets on 1080 vs 4k?

[Guest asrequested]

I gave up on hwa a while back. I built my server based on that. It was too inconsistent. Now it just works!

[Carlo 4330]

I originally kept all 4K media files in it's own 4K library but recently migrated to keeping multiple versions in the same directory and using the Emby version feature.

The advantage to using a 4K library is that you can grant access to only people who can play 4K media without transcoding.

 

The advantage to the version feature is that it seems cleaner and all media is kept together BUT you can't stop a client from playing the 4K version on their 1080p TV so it forces the server to transcode vs direct playing the 1080p version that was there.

 

I think a good couple of features that @@Luke could add to Emby that would help us currently in this regard:

1) Create a standard tags we all use in file names for 4K media such as [4K] or - 4K.  <-- Basically what Emby uses to determine the Version.

2) Create a new option the admin can grant to each user to allow use of the 4K tag.  Could also add 3D support here as well.

3) Only show the 4K version to those who have this flag set otherwise they just get the 1080p version as usual.

4) If client with 4K priv plays file but the server still thinks it needs to transcode then Emby STOPS and changes to the alternate version hopeing to avoid the transcode or make it much easier on the CPU to transcode.

 

So if a user was on limited bandwidth or mobile platform and it needs to transcode down to 720p (or lower) the 4K version would never get used as the source of the transcode.

 

Technically you could skip #3 above but why try to play a 4K video in the first place only to have to fall back if you know up front the person doesn't have access.

Edited September 27, 2018 by cayars

[pir8radio 1292]

I originally kept all 4K media files in it's own 4K library but recently migrated to keeping multiple versions in the same directory and using the Emby version feature.

The advantage to using a 4K library is that you can grant access to only people who can play 4K media without transcoding.

 

The advantage to the version feature is that it seems cleaner and all media is kept together BUT you can't stop a client from playing the 4K version on their 1080p TV so it forces the server to transcode vs direct playing the 1080p version that was there.

 

I think a good couple of features that @@Luke could add to Emby that would help us currently in this regard:

1) Create a standard tags we all use in file names for 4K media such as [4K] or - 4K.  <-- Basically what Emby uses to determine the Version.

2) Create a new option the admin can grant to each user to allow use of the 4K tag.  Could also add 3D support here as well.

3) Only show the 4K version to those who have this flag set otherwise they just get the 1080p version as usual.

4) If client with 4K priv plays file but the server still thinks it needs to transcode then Emby STOPS and changes to the alternate version hopeing to avoid the transcode or make it much easier on the CPU to transcode.

 

So if a user was on limited bandwidth or mobile platform and it needs to transcode down to 720p (or lower) the 4K version would never get used as the source of the transcode.

 

Technically you could skip #3 above but why try to play a 4K video in the first place only to have to fall back if you know up front the person doesn't have access.

 

 

Well I would rather just have one good version, that gets transcoded for whoever wants to play it.   4k or not..    So I want my server to be able to handle 4k streams even though they are at 1080 with it.   

[AmericanCrisis 28]

I agree with pir8radio. I'd rather just have one UHD/HDR version and let the server transcode for the client when needed. I don't have that many clients and my i5 seems to handle three simultaneous transcode streams at the same time effortlessly. What we need... is a way to map HDR to SDR on the server end. Possible? 

[Carlo 4330]

Well yea, many of us would agree with this but this could be a year off at the closest or maybe ffmpeg never supports HDR to SDR in a useful way that could be done in real-time.

 

I was just advocating what could be done today giving the tools we have now to allow for 4K and 1080p content being used in the best manner possible for all clients with the least amount of coding changes.  This wouldn't require many at all.

 

But even then, transcoding from 4K to 1080p or down to 720p for mobile might not be the best use of system resources especially on lower powered systems.  If you have both a 4K and 1080p version almost always the 1080p version is the one to use for anything that needs transcoding while the 4K version is for direct play only.

Edited September 28, 2018 by cayars

[Guest asrequested]

I'm pretty sure I can get mpv to do this. I just haven't had enough time to start testing the encoding options. mpv is built on ffmpeg, and has it's own algorithms on top, to map the HDR. So it should be employable by the server.

 

https://mpv.io/manual/stable/#encoding