One little question for x264 developers?

[Kostarum Rex Persia]

Hi, I have one little question for x264 developers. x264 doesn't support the error-resilience features of baseline and extended profile, not the alternative colorspaces of high profile.
So my question is: when and how these functions will implement in future x264 builds?

[BoNz1]

Hi, I'm not a developer. But I know the answer. It will be done; when you or someone like who how wants them decides to code them.

[berrinam]

Same response as always: when someone gets around to implementing them. Last time you asked for a feature (64-bit version), it later turned out you didn't even a 64-bit processor, so what was the point of nagging for it?

Are the error-resilience features or the other color-spaces so important to you? Perhaps you should learn C and implement them yourself.

Oh, and one last thing:
Hi, I have one little question for x264 developers.Yeah right. It's not just one little question. In all the time you have been here, you have nagged about:
CQM support in ffdshow (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=716566#post716566)
Interlaced support (http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=716137&postcount=1250)
64-bit DivX (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=97840)
64-bit XviD (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=97529)
64-bit x264 (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=97531)
Can you slow down with the requests, please?

[unskinnyboy]

Not to forget the kind words (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=725943#post725943) he had for the VirtualDubMoD developers.

[Manao]

I'm not a developper, but I can assure you error resilience stuff from baseline - extended profile won't be implemented. Nobody cares about them (Hint : x264 isn't a commercial product whose aim is to have the highest number of items in its description )

And what's the point of 444 when nobody can lay his hands on 444 content ?

[ChronoCross]

I believe that me and doom9 have already posted our comments about his trolling activities on this forum.

On a related note, good job everyone involved in x264. you guys have definitely implemented alot of things in such a short time. keep up the good work.

[foxyshadis]

The best part about error resilience features is that it's largely perfectly possible to tack them on long after an encode, at least for mp4. (mkv has its own, no clue if that's all implemented.) Pretty much the same way there's several ways to losslessly reorder an mp4 for streaming, so it's mostly superfluous for x264 to do it.

[Manao]

The best part about error resilience features is that it's largely perfectly possible to tack them on long after an encode, at least for mp4Not these features : it's arbitrary slice ordering, flexible macroblock ordering and intra constrained prediction. They need to be done during encoding. But they sure are useless ( except, once again, to give a hard time to decoders ).

[foxyshadis]

Ooh, I see, stuff that would also restrict the encoder quite a bit. I thought it was just simple stuff like AC/DC reordering.

[Manao]

That's why they are restricted to baseline and extended, and why they don't apply to real&practical profile, like main & high :)

[bond]

Kostarum Rex Persia, next time use a title that describes the content of your post

[Kostarum Rex Persia]

Alright, I will.

[Blue_MiSfit]

:rolleyes:

[Revgen]

The error-resilence feature isn't that important, but I'm interested in seeing Y8 (4:0:0) support.

I'm a classic movie buff, and would prefer encoding in greyscale.

But, it's not that important. X264 is a fine codec without it. Especially when it's free. It amazes me that there are commercial developers selling AVC codecs for $500.

[stephanV]

I doubt it would gain you that much more to encode in Y8. After all the UV planes are completely blank in greyscale which should compress pretty efficiently.

[Manao]

I tested with an encoder that supports 400 : the PSNR doesn't change ( that's normal, chroma gets encoded losslessly anyway in 420 when U=V=128 ), bitrate is decreased by 0.1% in cabac ( from 477.4 kbps to 476.9 kbps in cabac ), by 0.8 % in cavlc ( from 527.8 to 524 ). Speed increase is more worth it, imho ( 25 fps --> 30 fps )

[Revgen]

The speed increase was what I was interested in.

I can still remember the days when everybody was excited to be able to encode DIVX in YV12 instead of RGB.

[Manao]

Revgen : YV12 vs RGB speed gain was mainly because there were unnecessary conversion to / from RGB / YUY2 ( at that time, we didn't filter, we only used avisynth as a frameserver from the vob to the codec ). The codec itself was working internally in YV12.

But it's true that avoiding all chroma stuff creates some worthy shortcuts into the encoding process. But remember that libavcodec would also need to be upgraded.

[Revgen]

I'm sure that if x264 is upgraded, Libavcodec will follow.

I'm willing to wait. :)

[el divx]

Nevertheless, error resilience surely would help if someone would want to use x264 commercially(license it & stuff) for broadcasting or streaming, even if that scenario would be really far from ever happening.

[ChronoCross]

Nevertheless, error resilience surely would help if someone would want to use x264 commercially(license it & stuff) for broadcasting or streaming, even if that scenario would be really far from ever happening.

I don't think it can be commercially licenced if I rememeber correctly. Something about x264 having to pay fees to someone else(reason why there are no "official" binaries) and then the licensing would have some sort of extra fee. it's really complex which is the reason x264 is for personal and educational use.

[Manao]

I don't know any commercial encoder that implements error resilience. And x264's main aim is certainly not to be used commercially.

However, nothing prevents somebody from selling x264 commercially, as soon as they respect the GPL and the MPEG royalties.

[akupenguin]

The reason there are no official binaries is that I haven't bothered to figure out how to make a .deb or .rpm, and if you're not using a packaging system you can just compile it yourself. It has nothing to do with licensing.

[Sharktooth]

LOL

[this text is here to circumvent the infamous 5 character limit in posts and replys this board is infested with.]

[el divx]

I don't think it can be commercially licenced if I rememeber correctly. Something about x264 having to pay fees to someone else(reason why there are no "official" binaries) and then the licensing would have some sort of extra fee. it's really complex which is the reason x264 is for personal and educational use.

It can be used commercially as long as you have the bucks to pay for the h.264 license at MPEG LA, which is required if you want to use mpeg-4(or compatible) software commercially(broadcasting, distribution or both), since they are the patent holders.

[bond]

only the end product seller has to pay licenses

eg ateme doesnt have to pay licenses to the mpeg la for selling their codec to nero
but nero has to pay for selling the codec to the end user

that way its ensured that its not payed multiple times for the same codec