[FFmpeg-devel] donation for snow
Fri Nov 7 02:08:51 CET 2008
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Baptiste Coudurier <
baptiste.coudurier at gmail.com> wrote:
> Jason Garrett-Glaser wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at>
> >> On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 10:30:58AM -0800, Jason Garrett-Glaser wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 10:04 AM, Lars T?uber <lars.taeuber at gmx.net>
> >> [...]
> >>>>>>> Ive no doubt that snow could beat x264 given a few determined and
> >>>>>>> developers
> >>>>>> I highly, highly doubt this, assuming you stick to the basic current
> >>>>>> idea of Snow. I don't doubt that you or I could make a better
> >>>>>> than H.264 if I tried--there are dozens of places one could make
> >>>>>> improvements--but what I do doubt is the ability to make a better
> >>>>>> format *using overlapped wavelet*, since thousands of people have
> >>>>>> tried that for something on the order of two decades and failed
> >>>>>> miserably.
> >>>>> I had no intent to stick to wavelets once someting else had been
> >>>>> that work better, actually i was aware that existing wavelets with
> >>>>> ntropy coders perform poorly on inter frames before even writing the
> >>>>> code.
> >>>> Then what about using wavelets for intra frames only and other
> algorithms for the inter frames?
> >>> Because ordinary wavelets are even worse for intra coding than for
> >>> inter, since they don't have spatial prediction.
> >>> There are some ideas floating around in the realm of directional
> >>> wavelets and so forth, but nobody's come up with anything that can
> >>> beat spatial prediction yet, at least as far as I know.
> >> last i heard jpeg2000 beats h264 in intra coding quality per bitrate.
> >> So from actual comparissions (which arent recent i have to admit though)
> >> normal wavelets do beat h264s spatial prediction.
> >> As you claim the opposite iam curious upon what that is based? If you
> >> iam pretty sure i could find the old comparissions.
> > That's exactly what I was referring to: H.264 spatial prediction
> > trashes JPEG-2000, both PSNR-wise (over 1-1.5db last I saw) and
> > visually (in which case it beats it even more, since we all know how
> > badly JPEG-2000 fares visually.
> > I don't like to push these statistics though, as JPEG-2000 is widely
> > admitted to be a botched format, and wavelets can do much better than
> > that.
> Do you have any comparision data ? I would, too, be interested in having
> these comparisions, also knowing which jp2k encoder was used, test
> material, etc...
Here are two papers on the topic, I had a better one but I don't know what
happened to it
More information about the ffmpeg-devel