Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > New and alternative video codecs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 20th October 2009, 20:25   #21  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neiromaster View Post
I apologise for machine translation, but such text too long to write on English.
Your post is completely unreadable and I cannot understand more than about three words of it. Machine translation is useless; don't waste your time responding if you have to use machine translation. You have much better things you can do with your time, like improve SIF
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neiromaster View Post
3) All other used patterns have adaptive filters with the variable size. The size of the filter is dynamically switched for minimisation ringing artefacts around sharp transitions.

4) Therefore SIF practically does not give ringing artefacts without any postfiltration, and perfectly well compresses anime.
Then why is every screenshot in this thread a ringy mess? SIF has worse ringing problems than any other codec I have ever seen. If you could fix these, it might do a lot better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neiromaster View Post
In especially hard cases, like uniform movement of a contrast caption in the end of a film, the difference between the codec with half-pel motion compensation and the codec with quarteri-pel can reach two times.
And yet x264 actually biases against the use of qpel despite how useful you claim it to be. Of course, this is because of H.264's flawed qpel algorithm, which relies too heavily on bilinear interpolation.

I'm not at all against research into better techniques--H.264 has many flaws and can surely be beaten--but there's no need to be overly defensive and try to pretend that problems don't exist.

Finally, you claim SIF1 to be "free", but if so, where is the source? It doesn't seem to have come with the download.

Last edited by Dark Shikari; 20th October 2009 at 20:42.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 20:29   #22  |  Link
Neiromaster
Neiromaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
I'm just showing that SIF at current state is far behind x264.

SIF - 1024 kbps - 1280x720@50fps
http://www.mediafire.com/file/ojmk5d...IF-footbal.avi

x264 - 1024 kbps - 1280x720@50fps
http://www.mediafire.com/file/mw12jj...4-football.mkv

This time without screenshots. You should judge yourself what looks better for you in movement.

If I had option to watch live match via internet I would definitely chose x264.
And I also will not argue
I do not think that somebody will encode a football match in 1280x720x50 and with bitrate in one megabit.
In addition through the Internet it to transfer it will not turn out.
I think that it is encoded in VBR a mode and in two passes.
And such file cannot be transferred in live on a network.
Or I am not right?
Neiromaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 21:48   #23  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
Anyways, it's test time!

I don't at all expect SIF to get anywhere close to x264--it is certainly in early development while x264 is quite mature. But we can at least throw some tests at it. I've picked two random frames from it for comparison.

For comparison's sake, I've included "x264_hpel": a build of x264 that doesn't use qpel. As a result I had to disable a few other features that I couldn't easily adapt to avoid qpel (direct auto, bime), but it should be mostly fine. Obviously the purpose of this is to serve as a more fair comparison to SIF, which lacks qpel.

Source: LosslessKoishi.mkv
Bitrate: 2000kbps
Output files

Frame 86:

x264:


x264 hpel:


sif1:


xvid:


Frame 558:

x264:


x264 hpel:


sif:


xvid:


Summary:

1) SIF isn't too bad--better than Xvid, but it primarily gets to its position by blurring everything. It seems like the "psy optimizations" in SIF are likely the standard CSF masking bullcrap which says that you should basically lowpass everything beyond the first couple frequency coefficients. I advise the developer of SIF to drop this immediately, as it looks terrible.

It's definitely a good start though.

2) I told you that hpel makes things sharper, not blurrier, than qpel

Last edited by Dark Shikari; 20th October 2009 at 22:00.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 21:55   #24  |  Link
shark37
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
This time without screenshots. You should judge yourself what looks better for you in movement.

If I had option to watch live match via internet I would definitely choose x264.
I would like to draw attention to the apparent problem of ghosting for SIF.
shark37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 22:07   #25  |  Link
Neiromaster
Neiromaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
Your post is completely unreadable and I cannot understand more than about three words of it. Machine translation is useless; don't waste your time responding if you have to use machine translation.



Quote:
Then why is every screenshot in this thread a ringy mess? SIF has worse ringing problems than any other codec I have ever seen.
I will try to explain on examples.
For an example, i took a small example with anime
Also has compressed it with two different bitrates.

The first example is compressed with bitrate lower than usually twice.
http://mysif.ru/Avi/Shangri-La1.avi

The second example is compressed with bitrate lower than usually three times.
http://mysif.ru/Avi/Shangri-La1.avi

In the first case of a ring practically is not present

In the second it suddenly appears and becomes very strong.

It because at compression with normal bitrate the codec uses one set of functions.

And at very low bitrate it is necessary it will be switched to long filters, as causes a ring.

Actually it also uses Atak_Snajpera for misleading people.

In a reality on those bitrate which are really used for compression of a ring is not present.

Quote:
If you could fix these, it might do a lot better.And yet x264 actually biases against the use of qpel despite how useful you claim it to be. Of course, this is because of H.264's flawed qpel algorithm, which relies too heavily on bilinear interpolation.
I will not use algorithm from H264.
I am going to use absolutely other algorithm for interpolation



Quote:
I'm not at all against research into better techniques
R-D performance of 1/8-pel MCP on HD sequences

2-D non-separable adaptive interpolation filter

directional AIF

For an example

Quote:
Finally, you claim SIF1 to be "free", but if so, where is the source? It doesn't seem to have come with the download.
Source codes of that?
The codec?

The source code of the decoder is available a long time, but you apparently at all did not read it:
Easy-to-understand description of SIF

оr it:

http://mysif.ru/Patent.htm

Otherwise would not ask questions concerning a ringing
Neiromaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 22:10   #26  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neiromaster View Post
Do I need to say it more simply? Machine translation is useless. It does not produce understandable output.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neiromaster View Post
I will not use algorithm from H264.
I am going to use absolutely other algorithm for interpolation
I know; I was just explaining why in x264, qpel doesn't necessarily make things sharper.Yes, I read the JVT docs periodically in the hopes of them coming up with something not completely useless for once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neiromaster View Post
Source codes of that?
The codec?

The source code of the decoder is available a long time, but you apparently at all did not read it:
Easy-to-understand description of SIF

оr it:

http://mysif.ru/Patent.htm

Otherwise would not ask questions concerning a ringing
I still don't see any source code. An english description is not source code. If you don't have source code available, your codec is not free software, it is proprietary.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 22:14   #27  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 6,231
Quote:
I do not think that somebody will encode a football match in 1280x720x50 and with bitrate in one megabit.
Yes you are absolutely right! Nobody will encode football match with that settings using SIF1. It looks terrible compared to x264. It may not be detailed but at least it does not kill your eyes with this ghosting effect and weird analog distortion (on hd source it just looks odd). Also I don't like how some parts of grass move in SIF sample.

Quote:
Actually it also uses Atak_Snajpera for misleading people.
What are you talking about? Codec must be efficient at all bitrates. (LOW - MED - HIGH).

Last edited by Atak_Snajpera; 20th October 2009 at 22:20.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 22:35   #28  |  Link
Neiromaster
Neiromaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
Do I need to say it more simply? Machine translation is useless. It does not produce understandable output.I know; I was just explaining why in x264, qpel doesn't necessarily make things sharper.Yes, I read the JVT docs periodically in the hopes of them coming up with something not completely useless for once.I still don't see any source code. An english description is not source code. If you don't have source code available, your codec is not free software, it is proprietary.
I have placed the reference to an source code in the first post.

Quote:
The source code of SIF1 decompressor can be downloaded from here.
Probably nobody has guessed to look at a page bottom.
Here a direct reference:

http://mysif.ru/Files/Sif1DecoderSource.zip
Neiromaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 22:38   #29  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
But what about the encoder?
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 22:41   #30  |  Link
Neiromaster
Neiromaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 63
If somebody becomes interested in the codec, I can write the detailed documentation on a format
Neiromaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 22:44   #31  |  Link
Neiromaster
Neiromaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
But what about the encoder?
Encoder I can open in the future if there will be a real desire to help the project. While I do not see people who are ready to work over the project.
Neiromaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 23:13   #32  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 12,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neiromaster View Post
Encoder I can open in the future if there will be a real desire to help the project. While I do not see people who are ready to work over the project.
I'm pretty sure FFmpeg would be very happy to include your Codec, iff the source code was published under a LGPL-compatible license

This way your format would be directly supported by dozens of OpenSource video encoding and playback tools...
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.



Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 20th October 2009 at 23:53. Reason: L
LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2009, 23:17   #33  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoRd_MuldeR View Post
I'm pretty sure FFmpeg would be very happy to include your Codec, iff the source code was published under a GPL-compatible license

This way your format would be directly supported by dozens of OpenSource video encoding/playback tools...
LGPL, not GPL. It would be very difficult to convince Michael to include an entire GPL codec.

Also, let's just say the ffmpeg coding standards would require a rather significant rewrite of the SIF1 code .
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st October 2009, 19:15   #34  |  Link
Neiromaster
Neiromaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 63
Quote:
It seems like the "psy optimizations" in SIF are likely the standard CSF masking bullcrap which says that you should basically lowpass everything beyond the first couple frequency coefficients. I advise the developer of SIF to drop this immediately, as it looks terrible.
I'm not so stupid
SIF in itself as the algorithm, smoothes the image.
But the psychovisual model, on the contrary, adds details in the compressed image.

Quote:
2) I told you that hpel makes things sharper, not blurrier, than qpel
It because interpolation filter in H264 is given by such frequency characteristic:



But it too is not so good.

SIF is very sensitive to quality of interpolation.
The choice of correct algorithm of interpolation gives a considerable increase to quality for SIF.
Neiromaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st October 2009, 21:06   #35  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neiromaster View Post
I'm not so stupid
SIF in itself as the algorithm, smoothes the image.
But the psychovisual model, on the contrary, adds details in the compressed image.
It seems to add noise, which isn't too bad an idea (preserving energy is good), but it doesn't actually sharpen it at all.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd October 2009, 20:15   #36  |  Link
Neiromaster
Neiromaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
It seems to add noise, which isn't too bad an idea (preserving energy is good),
Any noise addition in the image is not make.
It is result of compression algorithm work.
But it is really similar to noise.
The psychovisual model has no relation to it.

The psychovisual model does other things, and really improves quality of the image.

Quote:
but it doesn't actually sharpen it at all.
Transition to new, more effective compression engine would be the cardinal decision of a problem. But I wish to make qualitative all other blocks of the codec, first of all the block of motion compensation.

And only then when the codec platform will be improvement to the right degree I will be make the new SIF compression engine.
Neiromaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd October 2009, 20:38   #37  |  Link
Neiromaster
Neiromaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
LGPL, not GPL. It would be very difficult to convince Michael to include an entire GPL codec.

Also, let's just say the ffmpeg coding standards would require a rather significant rewrite of the SIF1 code .
I can release an source code of the decoder under several licences, up to BSD-similar licence.

Unique important conditions for me it:

Quote:
no license may be granted to You by Contributor, under any intellectual property rights including patent rights, if: 1) Covered Code canít decode data which are accepted by the Original Code; or 2) Covered Code uses the set of resampling patterns which differs from a set used in Original Code. These modifications are not permissible, and no license is granted for such Modification(s).
Set of resampling patterns is a term from the SIF patent.

If these conditions do not contradict to GPL licence there are no obstacles.

In addition, any person can make the codec which compatible with SIF1 and release it under any licence.
Neiromaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd October 2009, 20:54   #38  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neiromaster View Post
If these conditions do not contradict to GPL licence there are no obstacles.
Official ffmpeg policy is to completely ignore all patent claims.

But regardless, such a condition is not GPL-compatible. Or for that matter, compatible with any free license.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd October 2009, 21:38   #39  |  Link
Neiromaster
Neiromaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
Official ffmpeg policy is to completely ignore all patent claims.

But regardless, such a condition is not GPL-compatible. Or for that matter, compatible with any free license.


Otherwise nobody will protect me if Microsoft release a codec which will be based on SIF technologies.
Neiromaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd October 2009, 21:50   #40  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 12,811
If you release your code under LPGL, then neither Microsoft nor any other company is allowed to incorporate your code into any proprietary product!

They'd be allowed to compile a library from your code and link their own (proprietary) applications against that library though.

But if they did modify/improve your code, they'd have to make those changed public under LGPL again. So with the LGPL you should be on the safe side.
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.



Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 22nd October 2009 at 21:53.
LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
sif1 open source standard

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.