Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
17th December 2014, 00:13 | #41 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 447
|
It's like asking the same thing about audio formats and MP3 - even though better things have been made, the incumbent was already "good enough".
So much like Vorbis and AAC, the likes of better lossy image formats will likely be limited to specific niches (Vorbis is used in games, AAC, outside of Apple, is used with video). Last edited by Nintendo Maniac 64; 17th December 2014 at 00:20. |
17th December 2014, 00:21 | #42 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 66
|
You might be right Atak_Snajpera, but that's a personal level of view. Modern websites, for instance, contain more visual material than ever before and in ever increasing resolutions and sizes. Faster hardware today means it's easier to navigate through large websites, and that means even more material served. Traffic load is probably exponentially larger per user than before, and today more people use internet and on various devices too, so total traffic must be even greater. I wonder how much big sites like Facebook, Google, etc would benefit from newer image technologies serving the same quality with a portion of the bitrate.
When talking about JPEG2000 it's a different story. I've tried it (and many others) myself once I needed to cram lots of large pictures on a single DVD disk, and gave up on it quickly. It simply has severe quality issues (some even when not filesize-constrained) and savings in file size are not as big as you would expect from an advanced format coming after such advancements in technology as we've had in recent decades. BPG (HEVC) on the other hand, does live up to expectations. Another thing I forgot - HEVC seems to have (postprocessing) tools to (finally) get rid of compression artifacts present in all other older image and video formats. It is really a welcome change to see it in video, and the images would really benefit from it too. If I'm not mistaking, some of those artifacts are present at milder forms even when the file is saved in a very high quality in older formats - and that becomes visible when zooming or printing. Last edited by gamebox; 17th December 2014 at 00:34. |
17th December 2014, 00:44 | #43 | Link |
RipBot264 author
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,816
|
Currently streaming media (youtube,vimeo,soundcloud and so on) generate majority of traffic. JPEG images are not a big problem like in 90s.
__________________
Windows 7 Image Updater - SkyLake\KabyLake\CoffeLake\Ryzen Threadripper |
17th December 2014, 02:25 | #44 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Santa Clara CA
Posts: 114
|
Quote:
Note that HEVC's deblocker is nearly identical to H.264. |
|
17th December 2014, 02:28 | #45 | Link | ||
Angel of Night
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tangled in the silks
Posts: 9,559
|
So far not much else has stepped up to replace PNG for lossless & alpha, though. PNG files are not only huge, zlib is very slow to decode and PNG's basic filtering wasn't designed for parallelism; all together, lossless HEVC can actually be faster on large images. WebP wasn't actually designed to improve JPEG, it was more of an engineering project to justify buying On2. If any company other than Google was behind it, it'd have been forgotten after the first press release.
JPEG XR is slowly gaining traction, built into Windows and Flash Player and some editing apps now, and actually supports everything from lossless to fancy colorspaces. We'll see how it evolves. It may not have the extreme compression that HEVC's excellent I-frame format gives, but being a real royalty-free standard is a big advantage. Quote:
The Still Image flag doesn't mean anything to the bitstream, it just tells the program not to treat it like a video. (No play buttons or any of that junk.) That doesn't mean hardware gets to ignore size limitations or DPB, but at least it's very relaxed compared to video, and fallback to software is easy. Quote:
I think this is more of a "get people talking" format than a real contender, unless some company adopts it and pushes it into international standardization. The patent issues will dog it otherwise, since JPEG, JXR, and PNG are all royalty-free. It's mainly of interest to bandwidth- or size-constrained programs, and the mobile world is still full of that. |
||
17th December 2014, 05:01 | #46 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 197
|
Quote:
|
|
17th December 2014, 05:27 | #47 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 66
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As an offtopic, I also hoped company behind (new) WinZIP format would create some worldwide format/extension for "single additionally compressed JPEG", like ZJP or so, so you could view the image directly instead of handling the archive. That would make their compression really usable in everyday life - currently it is only good for creating image archives for rare and "offline" use. @pieter3d Yes, I'm refering to Deblocking / SAO, but also 4x4 transform from H264 that removes "mosquito" noise. Last edited by gamebox; 17th December 2014 at 15:04. |
|||
17th December 2014, 09:55 | #48 | Link | ||
Angel of Night
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tangled in the silks
Posts: 9,559
|
Quote:
MPEG 4p10's arbitrary spatial prediction were the first that made an appreciable dent in I-frame sizes, which is why they were expanded further for HEVC. Quote:
And don't forget that PNG and MKV started out as one-man hobby projects. Sometimes they catch on, sometimes they don't. Last edited by foxyshadis; 17th December 2014 at 09:57. |
||
17th December 2014, 15:36 | #49 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 66
|
Quote:
With BPG (HEVC) for the first time the pictures have that "natural" feel to me. No blocking, no mosquito noise/ringing, no difference between "important" and "less important" parts and details in a picture. Excellent compression is a plus. JPEG-2000 had zones with obviously lowered resolution as a result of wavelet transform, and many "advanced" formats also made distinct visual difference between sharp zones with higher-frequency details and very "softened" ones with low-frequency "background". Sort of like the treatment of information you see in DJVU format - sharp vector-graphic lettering and blurred background. With HEVC loss of details is "gracefull" - affected parts of pictures don't appear blurred or blocky, they seem as they were "simple" and "continuous" to start with. And most of all, HEVC gets rid of "feathery" like look of H264 - that's what I call areas where high and low frequency details mix so H264 uses 4x4 and 16x16 blocks alternatively. You get a sharp edge of something as 4x4 transform always gives you, then just a few pixels away the very same edge gets blurred and dissolved by 16x16 transform, so after applying the deblocking on that the edge it ends up looking like the washed-out material "fleece", also waving left and right and losing shape even if it was actually geometrically precise. That's probably the biggest low-bitrate improvement I noticed in HEVC, and I guess we owe that to SAO. Last edited by gamebox; 17th December 2014 at 15:39. |
|
17th December 2014, 17:59 | #50 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 332
|
Quote:
|
|
18th December 2014, 13:10 | #51 | Link | |
Angel of Night
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tangled in the silks
Posts: 9,559
|
Quote:
Of topic, but damn, I hate this so much. MrSID seems to be a really terrible encoder; I regularly see text completely blurred out in old maps I request from libraries. Region of interest coding is extremely important, but it seems like a lot of institutions use a perfect/horrible dichotomy instead of gracefully degrading, or at least keeping the background ok instead of horrible, for when it does screw up. Text at 600 DPI and background at 72 or less is just too much. Last edited by foxyshadis; 18th December 2014 at 13:22. |
|
19th December 2014, 11:10 | #52 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1
|
libbpg-0.9.4 is out. Extract of the changelog:
Quote:
|
|
27th December 2014, 08:35 | #54 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 44
|
Static Linux binaries (32 and 64 bit) with x265 support: http://www.mediafire.com/?muwfwcucsglr217
In case someone has trouble compiling them. |
27th December 2014, 23:45 | #55 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 197
|
In case this is of use to some, I'll share my personal fork of libbpg with a few quality-of-life additions to encoding flags.
CRF 18 (as opposed to CQP 18) encode with weaker deblocking, higher quality chroma: Code:
-q 18 -deblocking -2 -chroma_offset -3 Code:
-s 200 -size_tol 3 -max_passes 8 Code:
-q 18 -s 200 -size_limit |
28th December 2014, 12:12 | #56 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 332
|
Hi xooyoozoo,
Thank you for sharing, I made some little tests. I build under msys/mingw-w64 x64 I changed makefile with CONFIG_WIN32=y CROSS_PREFIX:=x86_64-w64-mingw32- #USE_JCTVC_HIGH_BIT_DEPTH=y and removed -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables from CFLAGS for correct build ( don't know why this cause error with x64 ? it's the same with original 0.9.4 ). Now for your build I have this with -e JCTVC : *************************************************************************** ** WARNING: Transform skip fast is enabled (which only tests NxN splits),** ** but transform skip log2 max size is not 2 (4x4) ** ** It may be better to disable transform skip fast mode ** *************************************************************************** and a corrupt image : With my build of original 0.9.4 it's ok. With -e x265 all is ok but setting quality -q is now difficult/different between JCTVC/X265 ( your change CQP -> CRF ) for example -q 18 for -e JCTVC and original -e x265 give ~340kB with your -e x265 -q 18 ( crf 18 ) ~170kb therefore same as -q 25 for JCTVC If possible I think it would be better to keep -q -> CQP and create a new option -crf for crf I will try multipass latter. |
28th December 2014, 13:20 | #57 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 197
|
Quote:
Quote:
I don't see CQP as a serious mode because it also turns off CUTree, but the straightforward solution would be to turn off CUTree at 0 aq_strength. That would automatically put x265 into CQP mode. Even then, however, the original settings still relied on magical, arbitrary offsets (which I've removed) to match JCTVC and x265, and there's no reason not to make our own magic with CRF. Edit: I was wrong about CUTree being useful. Either it only works in inter prediction, or intra propagation of quality doesn't extend much more than a couple of CUs. Turning CUTree off now means that x265 CRF matches JCTVC QP a bit better, but it's still not 100% equal. Also, color-x265 + alpha-jctvc is now possible again. JCTVC's alpha qp is now obtained from x265's output's headers when needed. Last edited by xooyoozoo; 29th December 2014 at 21:36. |
||
30th December 2014, 04:12 | #58 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 197
|
I put up a comparison between default x265-based BPG and the same but with things like Psy-Rd activated. You'd probably prefer pressing Shift to switch between versions.
To my eyes, broadly-textured, "scenic" images like Machu Picchu, Isle of Skye, and Eaglefairy benefitted the most. Localized, finely detailed areas are next in line (the statue surface in Nymph, the girl's outfit in Production, the wings in Swallowtail). What stops this from being an unmitigated improvement is the occasional artifacts popping up in extremely flat regions (background edges in Fruits and Ballet Exercise). I had to lower psyrd slightly because it was even worse before. Psyrdoq seems to cause less issues, at least at low single digits. Meanwhile, deblocking actually barely made a visual quality dent, and chroma qp was only changed to stop haphazard moments of chroma noise with psyrd+psyrodq is on. |
30th December 2014, 10:42 | #59 | Link |
brontosaurusrex
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,392
|
xooyoozoo; looking at your example page, to my eyes psy wins with scenic images, portraits are always worse (But this may be a bit over-compressed for that purpose).
p.s. Trying to compile libbpg on osx .... (did it with some help from homebrew to install libjpeg). edit: testing testing here as well on the more CGI type of images. Especially interesting is the 2nd image with its 6.8K size, wow (quality sucks thought). Problems: - some/most images have some green line on the left/right border < fixed by using the full version of js decoder - "quantizer parameter" mode is obviously not the way to use this, if you have slightly/extremely varied image types (yes I need to re-read this thread more carefully). - interesting stuff happening with seemingly simple rotated dark-grey quads on pixelmoon image (4:4:4 encoded). Revelations: - The range of stuff this thing can/will compress well is really breath-taking. Image License: - You are allowed to use this images in your own compression tests, keep in mind that: certain logos portrait-ed are probably copyrighted to their respective brands. Questions: a. How do I use x265 mode? crf?
__________________
certain other member Last edited by smok3; 30th December 2014 at 22:33. |
|
|