Support AV1 Video Encoding and Decoding

[Eccentric Locust]

AV1 has been becoming a more and more popular codec for not just streamers, but also content creators and filmmakers. Video hosting platforms, such as YouTube, are now implementing AV1 as a way to easily stream video content to audiences at lower bandwidths. Filmmakers, and especially content creators, are asking for AV1 for creating high quality content without too much compromise for file sizes and ease of use when viewing.

Having the benefit of AV1 video will help with preserving the best image quality at a much smaller and efficient file size than codecs like H.264. HEVC/H.265 is supported in Premiere Pro and it's a very nice codec. In fact, both HEVC and AV1 perform very similarly. However, it would be wonderful to have the flexibility of additional codecs that are gaining traction in modern media.

HEVC isn't supported everywhere, largely due to their licensing slowing down adoption. Meanwhile, AV1 is open source, so it would be easier to adopt without the concern for licensing; thus, making it more popular with platforms than HEVC.

Competing video editing platforms have also supported AV1 encoding and decoding for some time and I have been wanting Adobe to look into it for a while.

Overall, I highly recommend Adobe include AV1 encoding and decoding support for Premiere Pro. I strongly believe it will heavily encourage more people to create the best content with a codec that is extremely efficient as it is excellent at preserving image quality.

[ovo1de]

Twitch is testing AV1
https://blog.twitch.tv/en/2024/01/08/introducing-the-enhanced-broadcasting-beta/

[Lateralus99]

Agreed. I don't go to all of the youtube videos for songs I hate just to post how much I hate them. It's a waste of time. If you don't care about AV1 move on from this thread. Nothing to see here.

[lukeripa]

It's not about not caring, but it's about having people understing what Premiere actually is, a NLE software, and what AV1 is, a delivery codec.

Delivery codecs are not good for editing as they are meant to be played one way, meaning editing with them is going to be heavy on the machine.

What that means is despite H265 and AV1 are space savers, they are so because they have a very limited use. ProRes RAW or any codec designed for editing is going to be bigger (if you want to maintain the same quality) because it's designed to be edited.

DaVinci implemented AV1 because it's appealing to online content creators as far as video editing goes, whereas Premiere has a more extensive and professional use (DaVinci professional focus are its color functionalities), and fact Adove supports ProRes RAW and DaVinci doesn't is indicative of that.

That's all the person is trying to say. Having every codec supported would be cool - if not for editing at least for converting the files directly from Premiere/Media Encoder themselves, saving you the need to go through third party softwares.

It's just dinigenuous to be here and be shocked there's no support for it.

[Robert2210560363hc]

"It's just dinigenuous to be here and be shocked there's no support for it."

I don't agree, there is support for it, it's in the form of a $90 third party plugin...

[lukeripa]

If you want to be scammed for support for a codec that's not designed for editing, suit yourself.

That won't change the fact AV1 is just a playback codec.

[DeivyTech]

AV1 isn't even new, it's already 6 years old. AV1 is royalty free, open source encoding. Why does the best video editing software made for professionals not support it? AV1 offer much more efficient file transfer and compression, it would save a lot of electricity for computers, servers, internet if we could do AV1. Now I'm forced to use inferior encoding or use a free video editing software like Davinci Resolve because it supports AV1 and Adobe Premiere pro 2024, where I pay big money, doesn't. Shocking.

[leonmincxy]

Attention Adobe Premiere Pro users,

It's time to address a glaring gap in our beloved editing software: the lack of AV1 support and other encoders. Let's face it – Adobe Premiere Pro may be one of the most expensive editing suites out there, but when it comes to keeping up with the latest encoding technologies, it's lagging behind.

AV1 is not just another fancy buzzword. It's a crucial encoding process that promises superior compression efficiency and visual quality, all while being open and royalty-free. In an era where streaming platforms are vying for the best quality at the lowest bandwidth costs, AV1 is the solution we need.

But here's the kicker: Adobe Premiere Pro doesn't support AV1 or many other modern encoders. While other editing software options are stepping up their game, frankly that's not good enough.

As loyal users who have invested significant resources into Adobe's products, we deserve better. We shouldn't have to resort to workarounds or third-party plugins just to access cutting-edge encoding technologies. Adobe, it's time to prioritize the needs of your users and bring AV1 support and other encoders up to speed.

We understand that software development takes time and resources, but in an industry as fast-paced as video editing, staying ahead of the curve is non-negotiable. We urge Adobe to listen to its user base and make the necessary updates to ensure that Premiere Pro remains a competitive choice for professionals in the field.

So fellow Premiere Pro users. Let's demand the support and features we deserve. Together, we can push Adobe to step up its game and keep pace with the rapidly evolving landscape of video encoding. It's time for Adobe to lead, not lag behind.

[Warren Heaton]

@leonmincxy 

The request to support AV1 is at 40 votes.  That's a little low.  Hopefully we'll see it go up.

It's been announced that MKV is being supported, but I forget how many votes that had.  However, it means there's hope for AV1.

[Lateralus99]

I would think Adobe would have the resources to hire some more developers after charging people $600+ per year. Where is that money going? If you want to make this software a subscription service, it means that it needs to be continually updated with features that the people demand. We are the paying customers. Without us, there is no Adobe.

[R Neil Haugen]

Let's see ... the new transcription/edit by text ... completely rebuilt color management ... adding several log formats, and getting the tonemapping designed for them ... several audio improvements ... um ... 

The bigger complaint by more users is too many new things, when a bit more stability would be desired.

It's just they haven't fixed your biggest pain point, perhaps. Understandable, as they've not re-imagined SpeedGrade, so even with all the new CM things, I'd really want some major color corrections changes. So my biggest pain point ain't done either.

It's all from our own point of view though, as humans ...

[Eric35342795y8s8]

It seems quite disengeniuos to say that there is not much interest in Av1 when a quick google search of "av1 adobe" pulls multiple pages with different comments and websites covering the topic, not to mention page views from people who didnt comment and just looked for answers. I don't know truly the real reason, perhaps its greed or because of a contract with Nvidia. But this is defintely a shady practice, and it wont end well, nothing bad ever does.

As for the comments adressing the lack of need to upgrade computer components which shows a lack of need for software advancements excluded from older hardware. I get it but its ridiculious when refering to one if not the biggest and best video editing software in the world, in fact this change should have happened 2 years ago when the Av1 codec was getting more popularized and stable, two years later the excuse still remains " But my graphics card is still good!". Lack of personal upgrades should not equate to buisness decisions from a company as a whole, if that were the case then Adobe should halt all future updates as the software is "good enough" as is? 

It seems that there seems to be little care from staff and community support on devising a fix that is not a third party adobe plugin, again this may be due to company contracts to hold on to hevc for as long as possible as it generates money since it is licensed and not open sourced. So greed seems to be the main indecator of a lack of progress, and like I said that will not end well for anyone involved and supporting such things. If adobe didnt charge people and was open source then it would not be at fault. But to charge and deny lack of support over multiple years, while denying claims of its importance is sinister.

[lukeripa]

Boards unless overwhelming with hundrwads of thousands of people claiming the same thing is not representative of anything.

In general, if you can count hundreds to a thousand people claiming to want something, you have to multiply that number by 10 to have a number who would have something being considered.

The thing is Premiere Pro wants to cater more to pro users than prosumer users.

And AV1 is not yet used in a professional manner. It's a codec that is used by companies to deal with end users, but it's part of no professional production workflow.

Would it be nice to have it? Sure. But there's no cameras who are using AV1s, just stream recordings.

[R Neil Haugen]

Lukeripa has great comments.

And your dispersions about motives are so freakin' lame. They just make you sound rather uninformed. I'm no lover of Great Corporations, but I've had enough time in person, over the years, with Adobe staffers and program heads, to know they couldn't care less about any of the things you insiste their greedily scheming about.

Which is not to say I'm always happy with the decisions they make ... which ain't the case. An awful lot of the choices they've made to put emphasis on don't directly help me any. But it's not because they "conspire" against me, or they're greedy ... it's because from their knowledge of that massive user base, what is actually getting used, and by what market segments, they target what will help their important segments first, and secondary targets for lesser needs.

My stuff ... well, often is pretty clearly a low level need. Ah well.

[kalamazandy]

I think you've nailed it on the head with the cameras not having it is likely the cause for lack of support. I think, just like people still stuck in thinking they have to use CMYK for anything related to print (which is pretty obsurd given how the majority of printers work and the majority of content is created primarily for on-screen usage with print as a secondary)

I think people are Definitely being mislead by their own bias with thinking that Adobe cares about professional use first, prosumers next. If this were true, they wouldn't have put work into creating lightroom cloud, Adobe Rush, Photoshop and illustrator on iPad, etc.

They're going to follow the money. One thing you all might be missing are corporate users. There are a Lot of them. And they often barely know how to open the software, but they Pay for it. Granted they are more likely to use Rush in something like this, but Rush is really just Premiere with a different skin on it and lots of limitations so should still apply. 

A few cameras, like Sony a7sIII for example, shoot to odd H.264 formats that record in 10bit 422 and Premiere edits them incredibly speedy. Part of that is likely because so many computers have some form of h.264 video acceleration built in. A few years ago, I remember seeing folks bashing h.264 in the same way. "not an editing format" "will bring your machine to a screeching halt" "low quality" etc. There are tradeoffs, but Sony is definitely recognizing them. You sacrifice a bit of color inaccuracy for files that are 1/8 the size. For something like an internal corporate video, you'd be an Idiot not to find that an acceptable sacrifice. For something like a feature films, probably not. 

Often people focus too much on a detail they care about, not thinking about the quality loss on something else. I'm sure we can all relate when choosing something like a lens for a camera. Yeah, I'd Love a T1.2 35mm but I don't have 40K to spend on a lens and don't want to spend 2K on a lens that has that, but glass with a ton of distortion anywhere outside of exact center. If you only focus on the aperature, you'll end up with a lens that captures a really narrow DOF.

My point is, AV1 Could be a Really nice editing format for users that have a data budget. I have to keep 100% of my footage, forever, because of compliance reasons and I'm currently looking into using H.265 to replace older footage that we are unlikely to use, but are required to keep. (Yes, I know I'd be deleting the old files, but legally there are exceptions for storing the files in an "archival" format without specifying what that means). I was just showing the results to another video professional and he was delightfully surprised that it could hold so much information. AV1 would be even better, but I wouldn't commit to that if I couldn't throw a clip into Premiere. The way I'm converting sLog3 ProResHQ footage to H.265 and the only noticeable loss is film grain in low contrast areas. I tested it on a piece of terrible footage recorded in ProResRaw from an FX6 with the sun through some trees behind the subject, recorded 3 stops too high. Terrible footage. lol

None of it was Great, because ProResRaw IS actually lossy. So in the grain you'll get some oversaturated bits. Those changed regardless of converting, but the overall color of the H.265 wasn't "worse." There was a slight color shift in some mid tone orange, but I had to push that Hard to see, well past anything you would do normally. 

So I get that it might not be "here" yet. But Adobe does things All the time that aren't "ready." I wouldn't assume anyone is lazy, stupid, etc. But it sure would be nice if Adobe would understand that if they added this, then they would help change the industry a bit. As cameras include hardware accelleration, you'll see more of them using formats Like AV1. I'm sure that's why Adobe has an interest in it. As soon as a Pro camera has figured out how to handle the hardware to utilize it if they can do that at an "acceptable loss" for the gain they get in the ability to use cheaper media, less battery drain, and bragging rights of smaller high quality files. My guess is it will be a model that crosses over from Prosumer to Cinema. I'm sure AV1 adoption would be appealing to someone like DJI, who requires light weight for most all of their cameras. 

[R Neil Haugen]

Excellent, thoughtful post!

Having been in pro imaging over 40 years, over the last decade in video post, and with that decade of NAB and colorist meets and whatnot ... it's always fascinating to me how different everybody works.

And that includes people working in the same you name it ... corporatate headquarters, network station, Hollywood facility ... it's amazing how many different paths can get the apparently same final job done.

So defining "which pros" use any tool is ... fraught with issues. I'm still surprised by the pros I run into that don't know squat about something that I think would be very useful for them, but do something entirely differently.

And looking forward to more of those discussions at NAB in a few weeks!

[Lateralus99]

I received an email that my yearly subscription price is going up. Is this a late April fools joke? If so, I guess I'm the fool for continuing to support Adobe. There's still no AV1 support, STILL no webm support. Greed knows no bounds.

[RoryBlyth]

For what it's worth, today is 2024-04-30, and I find this thread fascinating. Came here for the content, stayed for your (Haugen's) critical, dispassionate thinking. It's so refreshingly rational.

It's funny that the curmudgeon said "There's a reason everybody's left this thread."

Hello! Many years on, and this is clearly still very much alive.

Keep it up, Mr. Haugen. Those of us who appreciate thoughtful replies are with you.

And that's enough off-topic out of me. Back to learning about the craziness that is the video editing universe...

[R Neil Haugen]

The main consistent thing in video post ... is ... the crazyness! Yikes, but ... yeah.

NAB was interesting again this year. As usual, spent time in a number of booths due to the sheer brains available in those places. Adobe, LucidLink, Flanders, BlackMagic, DigitalAnarchy, a few others.

Illuminating discussions with several Adobe staffers, including Alexis Van Hurkman, who's got a new job that fascinates the Hades out of me, but that's all I could say about it ... we'll just have to see what comes over time.

BlackMagic is of course also trying to outguess The Future, and rolled out a couple very different from each other new cameras, and new tools in Resolve. My colorist buds seem to think this is the first new version that really ups the colorist work since maybe 17. And the cams ... fascinate me.

Flanders ... talking about monitor tech, wow is that changing! Very interesting discussion with Bram over there. And Dennis at LucidLink ... something we use daily! ... their amazing service has some new capabilites they were going to roll out publicly today ... but you wanna hear crazyness?

LucidLink had a massive, powerful attack, way past typical DDOS, but ... their systems worked to go into lockdown to protect currently online data, nothing online was breached or lost, and they're working to recover full operations.

Yowza! There's some real nutjobs out there ... and I'd still love it if the Adobe folks could get us AV1 ... Matroska ... ah well ...

[RoryBlyth]

Extremely Passionate Person: You're arguing that he's arguing from a personal position (what "[HE]" wants).

Um. You're posting ad-hominems. You don't back your arguments with data/sources (the burden of proof is on the person making the claim, and your market share estimations could, you know, be improved).

If you want to get somewhere with a rational person, question their content rather than their character.

There's more to this than your desire to stream your gaming or whatever it is (it's hard to tell one sentence from another in your replies). For example, Apple held off on AV1 adoption for a long time. Many of us left MS a long time ago. Try to consider this and reflect on everything you've said.

If you didn't account for Apple, you may not have done your research, and your response might be coming from a very personal, even agitated place rather than a grounded position.

Not having implemented first-party support for AV1 isn't personal; this isn't something Adobe is doing to you. And as you pointed out, there are alternatives to Premiere. You might find a more receptive audience in the forums for those other products.

Expert Tip: Your run-on sentences, while thrilling, noise-up your posts. Use the "Enter"/"Return" key to add newlines to your text, breaking it up into paragraphs for easier reading. It's hard to isolate an argument when its splatched in with editorializing.

[Warren Heaton]

@kalamazandy 

H.265 is very effective for creating a viewing copy, but needs to be carefully considered for replacement of ProRes.

If transocding ProRes 422 HQ footage to H.265, it's very important to be aware of the following, permanant changes to the picture and sound:

• Interframe video (all i-frame) is changing to intraframe video (frames with a GOP structure)
• Deep peak signal noise ratio (PSNR) is being reduced to very shallow PSNR
• Audio channels may change (for example, 4-channel mixed down to stereo)

If storage space cannot be made to accomodate ProRersHQ clips (be it source used in a locked cut or an edited master), I would transcde to ProRes 422 LT or ProRes 422 Proxy.

[RoryBlyth]

Apple is also part of that group, and they didn't implement support for AV1 on macOS or iOS until years later.

As a general rule, it's safe to assume the following about "crazy" decisions inside big business (or any business):

• Research: These companies do their homework. They know that, for every angry customer who speaks up, there there are many more who are silent. I don't know about Adobe, but every BigCorp I've worked for accounts for this when making business decisions (which is exactly what implementing support for any given codec is).
• Money: This is where it all happens. Which makes sense: Adobe is in business; not charity. When you plonk down an idea for a decision maker, they're going to judge your idea on its merits and its cost. Even a good value proposition can get shot down because of margins. From the outside, we have to infer: make our determinations in the absence of the confidential business context. If you had all the data Adobe does internally, you might see things differently.

The frustration? Understandable. But it's bidirectional. "Do unto others..." and all that.

A little politeness goes a long way. As does research.

[R Neil Haugen]

Wise and experienced post there ...

[beefplay]

It's a question but it's being posted as an idea because I want to see if we can push this, yet again, up to a threshold that Adobe will actually implement it. Why is it such a bother and why are we getting generative AI for video when we can't even get AV1 video importing, which so much of media uses, especially in my line of work. 

https://community.adobe.com/t5/premiere-pro-ideas/support-av1-video-encoding-and-decoding/idi-p/1413...

This was last year, there's been more from years before, and still nothing is done. AV1 is a format that is present day, better optimized in size and performance.

Give us AV1 support, let me drag a video into my timeline and it not say, "sorry no can do!" It's not good enough in 2024, esp when a free program can do it no problem. Not my first time seeing this talked about, and not my first time speaking to Adobe about it either, so you told me to post my suggestion, one you've been given many times, there it is. Posted. 

[scoopsky potatoes]

AYO, we got AI in Premiere Pro before AV1. 

[Verlxssener]

loooolll

still no av1

wtf