About x264 in year 2006, what I can expect

[Romario]

Hello, this is my very first post. And I want to ask moderators about x264 codec.

In year 2006, what I can expect about furhter quality and speed issues of this fantastic codec, what options will be introduce in 2006, etc. :helpful:

And, finally, anout final 1.0 version. When final 1.0 version will show up, at the second part of the year (september, october), or you guys won't announce 1.0 until 2007.

I am sorry, but I ask this because I really like to know these things. :thanks:

[CEC]

Are you waiting to get an answer????? :eek: :eek:

Ask your astrologer!!!!! :p :p :p

[Romario]

Are you waiting to get an answer?????

Why not, I simply want to know what I can expect in 2006 :)

[Sirber]

surely not an alpha. it will be pre-alpha for years. ;)

[foxyshadis]

Something I'm hoping for is a fully-engineered adaptive quantization patch, since the last one was more of a patch to fix the bluesky problem. The rest of the deep Juju magic of the encoder I'm simply not familiar enough with to have any idea of what could make it faster or better. ;_;

[lexor]

<dream>
I'm rooting for a Motion Estimation algorithm that's amazingly fast and at the same time even more amazingly accurate :)
</dream>

[Doom9]

ask again on December 31st 2006 and we'll be able to give you the full scoop ;)

[Mug Funky]

interlace support would be good. that and the usual quality and speed optimizations.

but i really would like to see interlace support. it's the only reason i'm not using x264 to backup my (standards-converted) DVDs. deblending takes too long and gives poor results most of the time. encoding interlaced sidesteps the problem pretty nicely.

[Doom9]

Take out your gun and force those morons producing interlaced contents to go progressive ;)

[CruNcher]

LookAhead™ :P

[Romario]

Thank you, but what about Adaptive Quantiyation patch, can someone add again that patch.

[ChronoCross]

Thank you, but what about Adaptive Quantiyation patch, can someone add again that patch.

you could in theory add it yourself. however you would have to change it to match the current cvs...I remember another thread where if you try to apply the patch without making sure the lines are correct then it will fail. However we have also discussed in other threads why the current incarnation of AQ was faulty(no offense haali). So you should use no-fast-pskip to prevent the problems until a better solution is found for AQ.

[Romario]

Ok, Thanks.

Sharktooth, I need your opinion? What do you think, what new features should be added in 2006, new non-faulty adaptive quantization patch, and what else.

Sharktooth, in general, what is your idea about further developing x264 codec.

P.S. About x264 decoder, I know that FFDSHOW decode all x264 streams (Avi, MP4 or MKV), but I think that x264 codec deserve to have own decoder.

[unmei]

h.264 may deserve its own decoder, but x264 shouldn't have to ;)

[ShAQ]

<dream>
I'm rooting for a Motion Estimation algorithm that's amazingly fast and at the same time even more amazingly accurate :)
</dream>

<dream>
Distributed converting via p2p in a LAN
</dream>
;)

[Sirber]

P2P in LAN is useless. Use samba :p

[Romario]

h.264 may deserve its own decoder, but x264 shouldn't have to ;)

Explain, please. Why do you think like that?

[omion]

Explain, please. Why do you think like that?x264 is just the name of an encoder which complies to the H.264 standard. If a decoder can decode x264, it will be able to decode all H.264-compliant movies (*) Therefore, having one decoder for x264 and one for all other H.264 encodes is silly. I'm pretty sure that's what unmei meant.

(*) except for some high-profile features that x264 doesn't have.

[Romario]

Ok, but Sharktooth, I am still waiting for zour opinion about possible new options for x264 in 2006.

[Doom9]

ask again on December 31st 2006 and we'll be able to give you the full scoopThat's the best you can get.