Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (4699)

• H.264 and VP8 for still image coding : WebP ?

  
  1er octobre 2010, par Dark Shikari — google, H.264, psychovisual optimizations, VP8

  Update : post now contains a Theora comparison as well ; see below.

  JPEG is a very old lossy image format. By today’s standards, it’s awful compression-wise : practically every video format since the days of MPEG-2 has been able to tie or beat JPEG at its own game. The reasons people haven’t switched to something more modern practically always boil down to a simple one — it’s just not worth the hassle. Even if JPEG can be beaten by a factor of 2, convincing the entire world to change image formats after 20 years is nigh impossible. Furthermore, JPEG is fast, simple, and practically guaranteed to be free of any intellectual property worries. It’s been tried before : JPEG-2000 first, then Microsoft’s JPEG XR, both tried to unseat JPEG. Neither got much of anywhere.

  Now Google is trying to dump yet another image format on us, “WebP”. But really, it’s just a VP8 intra frame. There are some obvious practical problems with this new image format in comparison to JPEG ; it doesn’t even support all of JPEG’s features, let alone many of the much-wanted features JPEG was missing (alpha channel support, lossless support). It only supports 4:2:0 chroma subsampling, while JPEG can handle 4:2:2 and 4:4:4. Google doesn’t seem interested in adding any of these features either.

  But let’s get to the meat and see how these encoders stack up on compressing still images. As I explained in my original analysis, VP8 has the advantage of H.264′s intra prediction, which is one of the primary reasons why H.264 has such an advantage in intra compression. It only has i4x4 and i16x16 modes, not i8x8, so it’s not quite as fancy as H.264′s, but it comes close.

  The test files are all around 155KB ; download them for the exact filesizes. For all three, I did a binary search of quality levels to get the file sizes close. For x264, I encoded with --tune stillimage --preset placebo. For libvpx, I encoded with --best. For JPEG, I encoded with ffmpeg, then applied jpgcrush, a lossless jpeg compressor. I suspect there are better JPEG encoders out there than ffmpeg ; if you have one, feel free to test it and post the results. The source image is the 200th frame of Parkjoy, from derf’s page (fun fact : this video was shot here ! More info on the video here.).

  Files : (x264 [154KB], vp8 [155KB], jpg [156KB])

  Results (decoded to PNG) : (x264, vp8, jpg)

  This seems rather embarrassing for libvpx. Personally I think VP8 looks by far the worst of the bunch, despite JPEG’s blocking. What’s going on here ? VP8 certainly has better entropy coding than JPEG does (by far !). It has better intra prediction (JPEG has just DC prediction). How could VP8 look worse ? Let’s investigate.

  VP8 uses a 4×4 transform, which tends to blur and lose more detail than JPEG’s 8×8 transform. But that alone certainly isn’t enough to create such a dramatic difference. Let’s investigate a hypothesis — that the problem is that libvpx is optimizing for PSNR and ignoring psychovisual considerations when encoding the image… I’ll encode with --tune psnr --preset placebo in x264, turning off all psy optimizations. 

  Files : (x264, optimized for PSNR [154KB]) [Note for the technical people : because adaptive quantization is off, to get the filesize on target I had to use a CQM here.]

  Results (decoded to PNG) : (x264, optimized for PSNR)

  What a blur ! Only somewhat better than VP8, and still worse than JPEG. And that’s using the same encoder and the same level of analysis — the only thing done differently is dropping the psy optimizations. Thus we come back to the conclusion I’ve made over and over on this blog — the encoder matters more than the video format, and good psy optimizations are more important than anything else for compression. libvpx, a much more powerful encoder than ffmpeg’s jpeg encoder, loses because it tries too hard to optimize for PSNR.

  These results raise an obvious question — is Google nuts ? I could understand the push for “WebP” if it was better than JPEG. And sure, technically as a file format it is, and an encoder could be made for it that’s better than JPEG. But note the word “could”. Why announce it now when libvpx is still such an awful encoder ? You’d have to be nuts to try to replace JPEG with this blurry mess as-is. Now, I don’t expect libvpx to be able to compete with x264, the best encoder in the world — but surely it should be able to beat an image format released in 1992 ?

  Earth to Google : make the encoder good first, then promote it as better than the alternatives. The reverse doesn’t work quite as well.

  Addendum (added Oct. 2, 03:51) :

  maikmerten gave me a Theora-encoded image to compare as well. Here’s the PNG and the source (155KB). And yes, that’s Theora 1.2 (Ptalarbvorm) beating VP8 handily. Now that is embarassing. Guess what the main new feature of Ptalarbvorm is ? Psy optimizations…

  Addendum (added Apr. 20, 23:33) :

  There’s a new webp encoder out, written from scratch by skal (available in libwebp). It’s significantly better than libvpx — not like that says much — but it should probably beat JPEG much more readily now. The encoder design is rather unique — it basically uses K-means for a large part of the encoding process. It still loses to x264, but that was expected.

  [155KB]

• Convert raw PCM data to video ?

  2 mai 2013, par user1801247

  I have file consisting of raw PCM data (no headers). I have been able to successfully play this file by opening it in Audacity (by importing the raw data).

  This file (as part of a game), apparently contains a video at the end of the file.

  I was hoping to be able to play this PCM data as a video without regard for headers as Audacity was able to do for audio.

  I took a look at ffmpeg to convert the .wav/.pcm to .mov, but there are no examples of going from audio -> video (an understandably rare scenario).

  Are there any tools out there to play my data as a video, without regard for validity ?

• Alias Artifacts

  26 avril 2013, par Multimedia Mike — General

  Throughout my own life, I have often observed that my own sense of nostalgia has a window that stretches about 10-15 years past from the current moment. Earlier this year, I discovered the show “Alias” and watched through the entire series thanks to Amazon Prime Instant Video (to be fair, I sort of skimmed the fifth and final season which I found to be horribly dull, or maybe franchise fatigue had set in). The show originally aired from 2001-2006 so I found that it fit well within the aforementioned nostalgia window.

  
  
  

  But what was it, exactly, about the show that triggered nostalgia ? The computers, of course ! The show revolved around spies and espionage and cutting-edge technology necessarily played a role. The production designer for the series must have decided that Unix/Linux == awesome hacking and so many screenshots featured Linux.

  Since this is still nominally a multimedia blog, I’ll start of the screenshot recon with an old multimedia player. Here is a vintage Mac OS desktop running an ancient web browser (probably Netscape) that’s playing a full-window video (probably QuickTime embedded directly into the browser).

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  Let’s jump right into the Linux side of things. This screenshot makes me particularly sentimental since this is exactly what a stock Linux/KDE desktop looked like circa 2001-2003 and is more or less what I would have worked with on my home computer at the time :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  Studying that screenshot, we see that the user logs in as root, even to the desktop environment. Poor security practice ; I would expect better from a bunch of spooks.

  Echelon
  Look at the terminal output in the above screenshot– it’s building a program named Echelon, an omniscient spy tool inspired by a real-world surveillance network of the same name. In the show, Echelon is used to supply plot-convenient intelligence. At one point, some antagonists get their hands on the Echelon source code and seek to compile it. When they do, they will have access to the vast surveillance network. If you know anything about how computers work, don’t think about that too hard.

  Anyway, it’s interesting to note that Echelon is a properly autotool’d program– when the bad guys finally got Echelon, installation was just a ‘make install’ command away. The compilation was very user-friendly, though, as it would pop up a nice dialog box showing build progress :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  Examining the build lines in both that screenshot and the following lines, we can see that Echelon cares about files such as common/db_err.c and bt_curadj.c :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  A little googling reveals that these files both belong to the Berkeley DB library. That works ; I can imagine a program like this leveraging various database packages.

  Computer Languages
  The Echelon source code stuff comes from episode 2.11 : “A Higher Echelon”. While one faction had gotten a hold of the actual Echelon source code, a rival faction had abducted the show’s resident uber-nerd and, learning that they didn’t actually receive the Echelon code, force the nerd to re-write Echelon from scratch. Which he then proceeds to do…

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  The code he’s examining there appears to be C code that has something to do with joystick programming (JS_X_0, JS_Y_1, etc.). An eagle-eyed IMDb user contributed the trivia that he is looking at the file /usr/include/Linux/joystick.h.

  Getting back to the plot, how could the bad buys possibly expect him to re-write a hugely complex piece of software from scratch ? You might think this is the height of absurdity for a computer-oriented story. You’ll be pleased to know that the writers agreed with that assessment since, when the program was actually executed, it claimed to be Echelon, but that broke into a game of Pong (or some simple game). Suddenly, it makes perfect sense why the guy was looking at the joystick header file.

  This is the first bit of computer-oriented fun that I captured when I was watching the series :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  This printout purports to be a “mainframe log summary”. After some plot-advancing text about a security issue, it proceeds to dump out some Java source code.

  SSH
  Secure Shell (SSH) frequently showed up. Here’s a screenshot in which a verbose ‘ssh -v’ connection has just been closed, while a telnet command has apparently just been launched (evidenced by “Escape character is ‘^]’.”) :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  This is followed by some good old Hollywood Hacking in which a free-form database command is entered through any available command line interface :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  I don’t remember the episode details, but I’m pretty sure the output made perfect sense to the character typing the command. Here’s another screenshot where the SSH client pops up an extra-large GUI dialog element to notify the user that it’s currently negotiating with the host :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  Now that I look at that screenshot a little more closely, it appears to be a Win95/98 program. I wonder if there was an SSH client that actually popped up that gaudy dialog.

  There’s a lot of gibberish in this screenshot and I wish I had written down some details about what it represented according to the episode’s plot :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  It almost sounds like they were trying to break into a network computer. Analyzing MD5 structure… public key synthesized. To me, the funniest feature is the 7-digit public key. I’m a bit rusty on the math of the RSA cryptosystem, but intuitively, it seems that the public and private keys need to be of roughly equal lengths. I.e., the private key in this scenario would also be 7 digits long.

  Gadgets
  Various devices and gadgets were seen at various junctures in the show. Here’s a tablet computer from back when tablet computers seemed like fantastical (albeit stylus-requiring) devices– the Fujitsu Stylistic 2300 :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  Here’s a videophone from an episode that aired in 2005. The specific model is the Packet8 DV326 (MSRP of US$500). As you can see from the screenshot, it can do 384 kbps both down and up.

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  I really regret not writing down the episode details surrounding this gadget. I just know that it was critical that the good guys get it and keep from falling into the hands of the bad guys.

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  As you can see, the (presumably) deadly device contains a Samsung chip and a Lexar chip. I have to wonder what device the production crew salvaged this from (probably just an old cell phone).

  Other Programs

  The GIMP photo editor makes an appearance while scrubbing security camera footage, and serves as the magical Enhance Button (at least they slung around the term “gamma”) :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  I have no idea what MacOS-based audio editing program this is. Any ideas ?

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  FTP shows up in episode 2.12, “The Getaway”. It’s described as a “secure channel” for communication, which is quite humorous to anyone versed in internet technology.

  
  

  

  Click for larger image