MJPEG vs. H.264by John Honovich, IPVM posted on Apr 17, 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
ioimage HD Analytic Camera Tested on Jan 29, 2015
Four years after acquiring ioimage, DVTel has released new HD analytic cameras, with the promise of higher probability of detection and lower false alarm rates. Now, the question ...
Testing Integrated IR Cameras In Snow on Jan 28, 2015
'Snowmaggedon 2015' gave us an oppportunity to test cameras in heavy snow conditions. Integrated IR has gained in popularity, improving low light images even in low cost cameras. However,&nbs...
2015 Video Surveillance Guide on Jan 27, 2015
The 250+ page, 2015 Video Surveillance Industry Guide, covering the key events and the future of the video surveillance market, is now available. Table of Contents How To Get It There are 3 ...
How to Hack an ADT Alarm System on Jan 26, 2015
This report explains the key steps in hacking an alarm system, like ADT, as was presented in a Defcon 22 presentation. The risk of such a hack has become major news as a class action lawsuit was f...
Simplicam Facial Recognition Tested on Jan 23, 2015
Facial recognition, available for $150? That's the offer from a startup, Simplicam, who has not only cloned Dropcam setup and user interface but has added in facial detection and recognition....
Bosch 4K Tested on Jan 21, 2015
4K promises more pixels but does it undermine WDR and low light performance? We tested the Axis 4K camera and there were certainly issues. Now, we tested the Bosch 4K camera, the Dinion IP Ultra ...
Largest New Video Surveillance Projects on Jan 19, 2015
140 video surveillance professionals, including integrators and manufacturers, shared the largest video surveillance projects that they have seen in the past year. Key Patterns The survey results...
IP Networking for Video Surveillance Course on Jan 18, 2015
This is the first networking course designed specifically for video surveillance professionals. IPVM is launching an IP Networking for Video Surveillance Course, starting March 10th. Lots of netw...
Bosch Buys $190 Million Integrator on Jan 16, 2015
The big deals continue. This time, Bosch has bought a US integrator, Climatec, that did ~$190 million in 2014 revenue.
Testing $50 Mini NVR on Jan 14, 2015
As an NVR, this performed very really badly. But, as a member suggested to us, could a $50 mini NVR be used as an IP / HD spot monitor? Adding a spot monitor or public view display in an IP sur...