MJPEG vs. H.264by John Honovich, IPVM posted on Apr 18, 2009 About John Contact John
Recently, IQinVision releaed an article advocating benefits of MJPEG.
[Update Dec 2010: We conducted extensive testing comparing MJPEG and H.264. Read our Test Results of MJPEG vs H.264.]
While I found the article technically accurate, well written and worth reading, the nature of the application and its economics demand that MJPEG be almost always avoided. Since H.264 is hot right now, this is a popular claim to make. However, a discussion of this can help examine the economics and operational drivers driving this interest.
Jason's central claims are:
1. With moving cameras or images of high activity areas, MPEG4 and H.264 provide little bandwidth savings relative to MJPEG.
2. Proper network design requires factoring in worse case scenarios so you will need to dedicate the same amount of bandwidth whether or not you use MJPEG, MPEG4 or H.264.
3. MJPEG provides higher quality because of no intra-frame compression.
4. Unlike MJPEG, with MPEG-4 vendors deviate from standards, increasing potential integation costs.
My counterpoints are:
1. For most users, cameras usually have low or modest activity, translating into significant savings for MPEG-4 or H.264. Most cameras in the world are fixed. Most cameras have significant periods during the day when there is little or no motion (nights, weekends, etc.) Even within PTZs, PTZs are often left at a home position, or iterate over a series of pre-sets stopping for 5 - 10 seconds each.
2. Many, perhaps most organizations, do not set network bandwidth budgets for worst case scenarios. Sometimes, organizations don't want to pay the money for the extra capacity but sometimes it can't be done due to constraints of reutilizing existing infrastructure (very common in wireless networks). In other words, organizations generally trade-off infrequent pixelization for immediate cost savings. Maybe this is 'objectively' wrong but this is common.
2a. Jason does not discuss storage but storage is a HUGE economic driver in the move away from MJPEG. I have had a number of occasions where my DVR/NVR with a 1TB hard drive was only recording for 13 days. Why? I had forgot we recently integrated just a few megapixel cameras using MJPEG. Let's say we can save 1 Mb/s by switching from MJPEG to MPEG4. Over a two month period, for one camera, that is 650 GBs. It would cost you $300 to $600 to add that much storage for each MJPEG camera.
3. As for quality, the difference in quality is usually close enough that most customers are ok with it, especially for the savings.
4. The issue with deviation from standards is generally a one-time cost/problem that can be amortized by the manufacturer over many different customers. In the larger scheme of things, it's mainly a nuisance.
In sum, then, the economics of reducing network and storage costs are usually very significant budgetary and operational factors that drive purchasing decisions. With megapixel manufacturers starting to announce H.264 support, it will be interesting to see what IQinVision does.
Comment #1 by Jason Spielfogel posted on Apr 20, 2008
Comment #2 by John Honovich posted on Apr 20, 2008
Most Recent Industry Reports
Testing VSaaS / Dropcam HD on May 15, 2013
Dropcam is pretty clearly the strongest upstart in the VSaaS market. While Axis has pushed their hosted service offering for years, it is beset by poor ROI and weak performance. There are dozens of...
Testing Panoramic Cameras Outdoors on May 13, 2013
Outdoors, PTZs tend to be a favorite for covering large open areas but they only see whatever they are currently pointed at. Panoramics are an emerging alternative but how well do they perform and ...
Testing CarCam on May 08, 2013
Dash cams are getting a lot of attention for the amazing video they inadvertently capture, like a crashing 747 in Afghanistan, a meteor explosion, Russian crazy fights and accidents, etc. Moreov...
#1 IP Camera Problem on May 07, 2013
Cost was, far and away, the number #1 cited problem in going to IP cameras / video. We asked over 100 integrators to name the "3 biggest problems / barriers" they found, allowing them to name whate...
Testing Covert Cameras on May 02, 2013
Covert cameras are regularly referenced in TV shows and undercover reporting. We ordered two of the most frequently sold covert cameras on Amazon - a Car Key cam and a PenCam, as shown below: We...
Stop The Lying and Crazy Claims on Apr 29, 2013
The last few weeks have been an embarrassment for surveillance, with a small number of companies turning this into a despicable marketing campaign perpetuating lies and crazy myths about what surve...
Panoramic Camera Shootout on Apr 22, 2013
Panoramic cameras are one of the hottest growing markets within surveillance. The combination of multi-megapixel resolution and super wide FoVs claims to deliver greater coverage than conventional ...
Top Trends in Access Control on Apr 17, 2013
All of a sudden, Access Control has momentum? After a long period of apparent stagnation and staleness, new technologies and devoted marketing campaigns have breathed life into the segment. Indeed,...
Best and Worst ISC West 2013 on Apr 15, 2013
Great attendance with a limited number of new products marked ISC West 2013. Brian, Carlton, Ethan and myself attended, putting together the following list of highlights for you to review: Bosch...
New Products ISC West Spring 2013 on Apr 06, 2013
Weakest season of product releases in a long time. Here is what we have covered so far: Best New Access Control Product? Fingerprint Reader Bosch Goes UltraHD/4K Milestone Arcus First Partner ...