Quote:
Originally Posted by poisondeathray
I personally don't find that particularly useful. I guess it might be good enough for "joe public" , they might not be able to tell the difference. But you can bet people that deal frequently with encoding, codecs, compression ; ie. people that post here - they can tell the difference between say, a crf 10 vs. crf 18 encode.
|
well "joe public" ultimately watches the content... I can tell the diff between CRF 10 and CRF 18 (frame per frame pixel peeping), but I also evaluate content on fully calibrated screens...
problem is w/ "scientific metrics" is that they often not relate a lot to the HVS (Human Vision System), which is the only thing that matters when humans watch the streamed content...
VMAF attempts to address that with their sample data... question always are if enough people were sampled, what kind of people (gender/age/race/ethicity - diff between European and Asian samples etc) and the sample procedure was done as best as possible...
Quote:
Originally Posted by poisondeathray
Maybe a conspiracy theory, but it's almost like a Netflix scheme trying to justify their low delivery bitrate practices  |
hah ! probably the reason to start the project..
