[FFmpeg-devel] donation for snow

[Jason Garrett-Glaser]

> Anyway, iam not trying to defend j2k or wavelets but you are hand picking
> images and parameters to make j2k look like crap, this surely does confirm
> that j2k can be very significantly worse than jpeg but says little about the
> average behavior. Which may or may not be better than h264, though iam pretty
> sure jpeg2k will perform vastly better than its predecessor jpeg on the
> average natural image.

I would have tweaked JPEG2K much harder than I did, but the software
didn't allow any significant changes to parameters.  I'm still looking
for a good JPEG2K encoder that is both good quality-wise and versatile
as x264 is, so that it can be appropriately tweaked.

As you hinted, I also strongly suspect that x264 is much better at
encoding H.264 than that JPEG2K encoder is at encoding JPEG2K, so its
still not an entirely fair test.  But its hard when there don't seem
to be any good ones... and before you say "write one," if I was going
to write one, I would write a better image format ;)

Dark Shikari