View Single Post
Old 11th September 2012, 17:20   #8  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwod View Post
I stopped reading when they said VP8 was better then H264. Obviously they didn't use x264 encoder. And yes, if they should join force with the Daala codec development.
I asked about that. This is actually a comparison with x264 and VP8 when encoding for YouTube. However, I believe they were comparing PSNR. x264 by default, and when used appropriately, rather pointedly doesn't tune for PSNR, but for perceptual quality.

The current VP8 encoders are very much tuned for PSNR; althogh I think they have implemented an SSIM tuning mode recently.

I wouldn't at all be surprised if when looking for the bitrate that gives the same PSNR between a typical x264 setting and a typical VP8 setting, VP8 would need a somewhat lower bitrate. However, I don't find that a particularly interesting comparison.

The Google people certainly spoke about the importance of tuning for perceptual quality, not just PSNR and SSIM. But at that point in NGOV codec work, it didn't sound like they'd done that much perceptual tuning yet. Which isn't unreasonable at an early stage of codec development; I doubt that much percuptual tuning has been done for HEVC implementations yet either.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote