[FFmpeg-devel] donation for snow

[Baptiste Coudurier]

Hi,

Jason Garrett-Glaser wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 10:30:58AM -0800, Jason Garrett-Glaser wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 10:04 AM, Lars T?uber <lars.taeuber at gmx.net> wrote:
>> [...]
>>>>>>> Ive no doubt that snow could beat x264 given a few determined and smart
>>>>>>> developers
>>>>>> I highly, highly doubt this, assuming you stick to the basic current
>>>>>> idea of Snow.  I don't doubt that you or I could make a better format
>>>>>> than H.264 if I tried--there are dozens of places one could make
>>>>>> improvements--but what I do doubt is the ability to make a better
>>>>>> format *using overlapped wavelet*, since thousands of people have
>>>>>> tried that for something on the order of two decades and failed
>>>>>> miserably.
>>>>> I had no intent to stick to wavelets once someting else had been implemented
>>>>> that work better, actually i was aware that existing wavelets with existing
>>>>> ntropy coders perform poorly on inter frames before even writing the wavelet
>>>>> code.
>>>> Then what about using wavelets for intra frames only and other algorithms for the inter frames?
>>> Because ordinary wavelets are even worse for intra coding than for
>>> inter, since they don't have spatial prediction.
>>>
>>> There are some ideas floating around in the realm of directional
>>> wavelets and so forth, but nobody's come up with anything that can
>>> beat spatial prediction yet, at least as far as I know.
>> last i heard jpeg2000 beats h264 in intra coding quality per bitrate.
>> So from actual comparissions (which arent recent i have to admit though)
>> normal wavelets do beat h264s spatial prediction.
>> As you claim the opposite iam curious upon what that is based? If you want
>> iam pretty sure i could find the old comparissions.
> 
> That's exactly what I was referring to: H.264 spatial prediction
> trashes JPEG-2000, both PSNR-wise (over 1-1.5db last I saw) and
> visually (in which case it beats it even more, since we all know how
> badly JPEG-2000 fares visually.
> 
> I don't like to push these statistics though, as JPEG-2000 is widely
> admitted to be a botched format, and wavelets can do much better than
> that.

Do you have any comparision data ? I would, too, be interested in having
these comparisions, also knowing which jp2k encoder was used, test
material, etc...

-- 
Baptiste COUDURIER                              GnuPG Key Id: 0x5C1ABAAA
Key fingerprint                 8D77134D20CC9220201FC5DB0AC9325C5C1ABAAA
checking for life_signs in -lkenny... no