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. |
14th September 2008, 11:01 | #21 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: France
Posts: 2,856
|
Bond : golden frames are indeed like references in h264, but limited to 2 references max : the previous reference, and another one, that can be updated whenever they want. It seems it can be updated piecewise too, which makes it a bit more flexible than 2 references with h264. As for the usefulness of that, I don't know. It must help in some contrive cases, but beyond that... In any case, it will help less than bframes & bpyramids would, but they can't use those because they are afraid of patents (though bframes should be patentless by now, I think).
Their description of their loop filter and its adaptivity to motion doesn't impress me. h264 loop-filter also adapts to motion (though the way it adapts to motion seems different from VP8's). Their visual results for h264 seems a bit strange, since I seem to see a good old IDCT mismatch drift during the GOP, which can't happen with AVC. As stated by nm, it more looks like ASP than AVC. As for the PSNR curves, they must always be taken with a (huge) grain of salt, wherever they come from. Since they don't say which encoder and which settings are used, however, the curve most probably are correct. They just don't mean anything and can be ignored. Dark Shikari : sagittaire is right, when it came out, VP7 was lighter than existing AVC decoders, and more than hold its ground quality-wise. Our encoder, at that time, only managed to consistently beat it when we included High profile.
__________________
|
14th September 2008, 19:52 | #22 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,926
|
Yeah about the PSNR results they dont say alot tough for H.264 basicly with inloop deblocking it means higher PSNR and most times looks awfull tough with VP8 it doesn't have to be the same because they use a complete different deblocking aproach which seems really interesting , though 50% is a heavy claim thats like they wanted to say: "hey look we drove ahead of MPEG before they even get started with H.265"
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :) It is about Time Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late ! http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004 Last edited by CruNcher; 14th September 2008 at 20:10. |
16th September 2008, 02:06 | #24 | Link |
Mr. Sandman
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Haddonfield, IL
Posts: 11,768
|
i wonder if they will release a free-for-personal-use encoder.
then speculation will end...
__________________
MPEG-4 ASP Custom Matrices: EQM V1(old), EQM AutoGK Sharpmatrix (aka EQM V2), EQM V3HR (updated 01/10/2004), EQM V3LR, EQM V3ULR (updated 04/02/2005), EQM V3UHR (updated 17/12/2004) and EQM V3EHR (updated 05/10/2004) Info about my ASP matrices. MPEG-4 AVC Custom Matrices: EQM AVC-HR Info about my AVC matrices My x264 builds. Mooo!!! |
16th September 2008, 02:28 | #25 | Link |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
Plus a free-for-personal-use decoder library, of course
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ |
16th September 2008, 08:58 | #26 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,926
|
Maybe this also implies they gonna Open Source VP7 now
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :) It is about Time Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late ! http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004 |
16th September 2008, 09:58 | #28 | Link |
Turkey Machine
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lowestoft, UK (but visit lots of places with bribes [beer])
Posts: 1,953
|
VP4's decodable in ffmpeg, yes no? As is VP5, yes no?
__________________
On Discworld it is clearly recognized that million-to-one chances happen 9 times out of 10. If the hero did not overcome huge odds, what would be the point? Terry Pratchett - The Science Of Discworld |
16th September 2008, 16:19 | #30 | Link |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
Most likely this is thanks to the reverse engineering capabilities of the ffmpeg developers, not thanks to On2...
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 16th September 2008 at 17:16. |
16th September 2008, 16:24 | #31 | Link |
Mr. Sandman
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Haddonfield, IL
Posts: 11,768
|
i wonder if on2tech is still around.
his last forum "activity" was October 2007.
__________________
MPEG-4 ASP Custom Matrices: EQM V1(old), EQM AutoGK Sharpmatrix (aka EQM V2), EQM V3HR (updated 01/10/2004), EQM V3LR, EQM V3ULR (updated 04/02/2005), EQM V3UHR (updated 17/12/2004) and EQM V3EHR (updated 05/10/2004) Info about my ASP matrices. MPEG-4 AVC Custom Matrices: EQM AVC-HR Info about my AVC matrices My x264 builds. Mooo!!! |
16th March 2009, 17:28 | #32 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2
|
Some new info about On2 VP8 available.
http://www.dspdesignline.com/howto/214303691 |
17th March 2009, 01:10 | #33 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,315
|
Quote:
I think it isn't correct thing to wait really new technology from On2. VP6 was H.263++(-like) codec. As inverse engineering shows VP6 uses reference frames, deblock as well as H.263++ or H.26L VP7 is mostly H.264-like codec. Right now there is some work around H.265. http://yufeng1684.bokee.com/6776683.html http://iphome.hhi.de/suehring/tml/download/KTA/ on2 may just buy licenses for some compression tools from big boys. There is some information that VP8 may be released in the end of April (after more than 6 months of waporwaring (farting) and paper release and rumors from 2007) Last edited by IgorC; 17th March 2009 at 01:21. |
|
17th March 2009, 02:47 | #34 | Link |
x264 developer
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,666
|
Doubtful, considering it doesn't even have B-frames, last I recall... and given that in many cases it came out worse than MPEG-2, I don't think we can expect much from them.
|
17th March 2009, 04:01 | #35 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,348
|
The first one is better. You can't measure quality solely based on the amount of background noise present (I say noise, as the mpeg2 is a sea of artifacts). All this picture demonstrates is that vp7 could benefit from aq, which is incredibly ironic considering how long x264 needed aq before it got it, and considering that people who said x264 was killing details were often shouted down, until aq is released, then its the reverse bias to a similarly absurd extent.
|
17th March 2009, 04:18 | #36 | Link | |
x264 developer
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,666
|
Quote:
AQ helps solve the problem, but it's not a scapegoat. And yes, you can measure quality based on the amount of background noise. It's the job of an encoder to make the result look like the source to the human eye, and if background noise is what is necessary to do that, then so be it. |
|
17th March 2009, 04:54 | #37 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,315
|
@DS
Both screenshots you post look badly. VP7 is way smooth but MPEG2 is a soap of macroblocks. And please, can you post original.png too? I marked the few areas of you screenshot where MPEG-2 had simply unacceptable quality.http://img11.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mpeg2marked.png One encoded video isn't representative of whole codec efficiency. Maybe VP7 is worse than MPEG-2 in 2% but is better in other 98%. Here is other example (2 pass mode, 1500 kbit/s) Source: lossless ftp://ftp.tnt.uni-hannover.de/pub/sv...rig_02_yuv.zip MPEG-2 (HC encoder, best quality) http://img19.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hc1500.png VP7 (vp7.0.10.0, best quality) http://img19.imageshack.us/my.php?image=vp71500.png Original http://img19.imageshack.us/my.php?image=originalu.png Encoded videos: http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?u2onmmztgui Actually VP7 is good as x264 was in 2005 (mostly first middle of the year). Then on2 has stopped to improve VP7. |
17th March 2009, 04:58 | #38 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,348
|
I'm not sure what the fuss is about, marketing departments always exagerate beyond all semblence of reality, and its always nice to have more competition, and more options, though I am quite certain i will be sticking with x264 for the forseable future.
I think you have missed my point, or are avoiding it. vp7 is clearly better here, look at the text, look at the pillars, look at the wing, look at the main character, and the foreground effects. vp7 does look like its filter is too strong, but you are aware that it is adjustable on playback, right? I'm not saying that x264 isn't most likely better then vp8, or that vp7 is still competetive with x264 (though it must be said that x264 is not representative of the state of avc as a standard). However your posts in this thread show clear bias. Vp7 was as good as they claimed it was when it was released, or rather it was close enough, and much more capable of living up to the marketing then most codecs. I don't used vp(insert number), but I have tested most of them, 3 is about on par with mpeg2, 4 and 5 don't apear much different then 3 to me, 6 was better then asp, but had poor rate control, 7 was competetive with the best available codecs upon release, but was extremely slow to encode with good settings, and was eventually eclipsed by avc, in particular ateme and then x264. I expect vp8 to be a good codec, of similar quality to x264, and if it is released for personal use, it will be interesting to test. Surprisingly, I agree almost completely with Sagittaire. |
17th March 2009, 05:07 | #39 | Link | |
x264 developer
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,666
|
Quote:
If after looking through this you can still say with a straight face that VP7 is competitive with AVC--let alone ASP!--you're clearly just shilling for On2; there's no other reasonable explanation. I myself thought VP7 wasn't too bad until I ran this test. The results shocked me as well. Maybe it's just this video, but it's rather biased to go and write off all situations where an encoder fails as a "pathological case" and only accept those that it does well on. IMO VP3 is roughly competitive with MPEG-2, VP6 with ASP, and VP7 is roughly competitive with VC-1 on average (but obviously, in some cases, it can be much worse). VP6 doesn't seem to have the kind of pathological cases VP7 has.
__________________
Follow x264 development progress | akupenguin quotes | x264 git status ffmpeg and x264-related consulting/coding contracts | Doom10 Last edited by Dark Shikari; 17th March 2009 at 05:12. |
|
17th March 2009, 05:21 | #40 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,315
|
Quote:
Who asked you to post them? Quote:
I do say: VP7 is H.264 like codecs. (speaking of generation, not quality). Actually VP7 is good as x264 was in 2005 (mostly first middle of the year). Then on2 has stopped to improve VP7. Quote:
What part of the statement you didnt understand? One encoded video isn't representative of whole codec efficiency. You get on people nerves easily. Manao, Sagi, me and mp4 guy had told you: VP7 was comparable to x264 in 2005 and it's way better than MPEG2, ASP. Last edited by IgorC; 17th March 2009 at 05:24. |
|||
Tags |
vm8 |
|
|