[FFmpeg-devel] Review request - ra288.{c,h} ra144.{c,h}
Vitor Sessak
vitor1001
Mon Sep 15 19:49:41 CEST 2008
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 11:29:08PM +0200, Vitor Sessak wrote:
>> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 08:17:18PM +0200, Vitor Sessak wrote:
>>>> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Vitor Sessak wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>>>> static int ra288_decode_frame(AVCodecContext * avctx, void *data,
>>>>>>>>>>>> int *data_size, const uint8_t * buf,
>>>>>>>>>>>> int buf_size)
>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>> int16_t *out = data;
>>>>>>>>>>>> int i, j;
>>>>>>>>>>>> RA288Context *ractx = avctx->priv_data;
>>>>>>>>>>>> GetBitContext gb;
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> if (buf_size < avctx->block_align) {
>>>>>>>>>>>> av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR,
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Error! Input buffer is too small [%d<%d]\n",
>>>>>>>>>>>> buf_size, avctx->block_align);
>>>>>>>>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> if (*data_size < 32*5*2)
>>>>>>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> init_get_bits(&gb, buf, avctx->block_align * 8);
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> for (i=0; i < 32; i++) {
>>>>>>>>>>>> float gain = amptable[get_bits(&gb, 3)];
>>>>>>>>>>>> int cb_coef = get_bits(&gb, 6 + (i&1));
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> decode(ractx, gain, cb_coef);
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> for (j=0; j < 5; j++)
>>>>>>>>>>>> *(out++) = 8 * ractx->sp_block[36 + j];
>>>>>>>>>>> if float output works already, then this could output floats, if not then
>>>>>>>>>>> this could use lrintf()
>>>>>>>>>> I've tried the float output (with the attached patch) and it didn't work.
>>>>>>>>> ok
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Using lrint() changes slightly the output (PSNR about 99), is it expected?
>>>>>>>>> yes, it does round differently (=more correctly)
>>>>>>>> Too correct maybe. PSNR to binary decoder with SVN:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> stddev: 0.15 PSNR:112.70 bytes: 990720/ 1013760
>>>>>>>> stddev: 0.04 PSNR:122.74 bytes: 368640/ 368640
>>>>>>>> stddev: 0.07 PSNR:118.84 bytes: 460800/ 458752
>>>>>>>> stddev: 0.31 PSNR:106.24 bytes: 6451200/ 6451200
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Using lrint()
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> stddev: 0.70 PSNR: 99.33 bytes: 990720/ 1013760
>>>>>>>> stddev: 0.70 PSNR: 99.35 bytes: 368640/ 368640
>>>>>>>> stddev: 0.70 PSNR: 99.35 bytes: 460800/ 458752
>>>>>>>> stddev: 0.75 PSNR: 98.76 bytes: 6451200/ 6451200
>>>>>>> yes, the rounding is more accurate, and differs by +-1 50% of the time from
>>>>>>> the binary decoder, sqrt(0.5) ~ 0.7
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you want a proof that it is better, you should compare the original
>>>>>>> pcm that is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> X -> encoder -> binary decoder -> Y
>>>>>>> -> FF decoder ->Z
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and look at how the X-Y and X-Z change relative to each other.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also you would see a similar PSNR change relative to the binary decoder if
>>>>>>> you would output floats.
>>>>>> I've already tried comparing PSNR to the original input when I was
>>>>>> looking for a way to test float codecs in FATE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> vitor at vitor$ ffmpeg -i luckynightmono2.ra -ac 1 -ar 8000 test.wav
>>>>>> vitor at vitor$ ffmpeg -i luckynight.wav -ac 1 -ar 8000 test2.wav
>>>>>> vitor at vitor$ tiny_psnr test.wav test2.wav 2 0 44
>>>>>> stddev: 5981.39 PSNR: 20.78 bytes: 990720/ 967662
>>>>>> vitor at vitor$ tiny_psnr test.wav test2.wav 2 2 44
>>>>>> stddev: 5982.77 PSNR: 20.78 bytes: 990718/ 967662
>>>>>> vitor at vitor$ tiny_psnr test.wav test2.wav 2 100 44
>>>>>> stddev: 6012.76 PSNR: 20.74 bytes: 990620/ 967662
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And by looking at results, if I change the "skip bytes" parameter I
>>>>>> don't get much change in PSNR. For me, this is a signal that the value I
>>>>>> got is meaningless (since it don't change a lot if I compare it with
>>>>>> different data). I asked about it in IRC and people told me that PSNR
>>>>>> didn't worked very well to LPC vocoders. Sample in
>>>>>> http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/real/AC-28_8/ .
>>>>> considering that the claimed encoder input has
>>>>> 10668716 bytes of 44.1khz at stereo
>>>>> and that /2/44100*8000 is ~967684
>>>>> and the ra288 decoder output has 990764 bytes i cant help but wonder
>>>>> why, but of course this is incompareable. PSNR or otherwise
>>>> Yes, the files have different sizes. That's why I started poking with
>>>> "skip bytes" and tried to cut the files. But I didn't succeeded in
>>>> making they match whatever I did.
>>> how has the .ra file been generated?
>>> what happens with a 2x as long input file? does the size difference
>>> stay constant or grow?
>>>
>>> what does the binary decoder produce for it? is that also too big?
>> Original wav: 967706 bytes
>> FFmpeg decoder: 990764 bytes
>> Original decoder: 1013804 bytes
>>
>> Go figure...
>
> the decoder outputs 3 seconds more than what is in the claimed original.
> How does it sound? is the audio stretched to the bigger length are there
> 3 seconds of distortion or silence somewhere?
Original wav: 967706 bytes
FFmpeg decoder: 990764 bytes 1 second of silence in the end
Original decoder: 1013804 bytes 3 seconds of silence in the end
Anyway, nothing of that explains the PSNR discrepancy...
-Vitor
More information about the ffmpeg-devel
mailing list