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.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > New and alternative video codecs

View Poll Results: Which image format will see a wide adoption?
AV1 19 38.00%
HEVC 6 12.00%
WebP 2 4.00%
JPEG XL 1 2.00%
JPEG XR 0 0%
Daala 1 2.00%
FLIF 2 4.00%
PIK 3 6.00%
JPEG will reign forever 23 46.00%
I don't know/don't care 7 14.00%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 50. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 13th March 2018, 09:38   #21  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamaika View Post
Oh, and where is the HEIF software running under Windows correctly. What is on github simply doesn't work.
MediaInfo admittedly added images BPG to the software, but HEIF isn't interested. FFmpeg also.
I agree, I've been working on better integrating it into ImageMagick myself, and MediaInfo & ffmpeg are on my list to work on next. It's infuriating how most codecs make no effort to get themselves implemented more generally.

It's also infuriating that Microsoft did the hard work to bring support for wdp/hdp/jxr across the whole closed & open source ecosystem, even into Firefox and Chrome, and no one was the slightest bit interested in using it. JPEG XR is actually a FLOSS format with a ton of capabilities, and people are more interested in HEIC just because Apple uses it, so we're stuck with patents.
__________________
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. ~ Ed Howdershelt
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th March 2018, 16:54   #22  |  Link
Neillithan
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 124
I'm betting my money on AV1 just because Google shoehorned WebP into Chrome, and we can expect them to do the same with AV1. Once that happens, >60% browser market share will have access to it, while you can provide a fallback method for non compliant browsers. Meanwhile, AV1 has support from an endless list of companies, hardware support is coming, everyone seems to be really excited about this free, open source, royalty free format that's getting collaboration from half a dozen projects. AV1 image format is basically going to make a huge impact whenever it arrives.

That doesn't mean I think AV1 is the best image format. It certainly isn't, and has plenty of room for improvements. It has a problem with saturation, and loss of grainy / noisy micro details. However, if you want a tiny image file with an alpha channel, AV1 is going to be absolutely fantastic for that. Jpeg will still always be king of noisy/grainy images... but chances are, you won't care about that if you care about filesize.

The PIK format is interesting, as it appears to be true successor to JPEG and great at preserving micro details and noise/grain.... however, it has some artifacting issues around edges that I think need to be resolved... and even then, it's pretty much a doomed format since adoption rate will be a big whopping 0%, guaranteed. I'm not losing any sleep over this.

As soon as AV1 image format arrives, apples HEIF/HEIC image format is essentially doomed. Apple is a retarded ass company that somehow manages to make money, but I'm fairly confident their decision to push HEIC/HEIF is about the stupidest decision they've made yet.

Last edited by Neillithan; 18th March 2018 at 17:00.
Neillithan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th March 2018, 06:32   #23  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neillithan View Post
I'm betting my money on AV1 just because Google shoehorned WebP into Chrome, and we can expect them to do the same with AV1. Once that happens, >60% browser market share will have access to it, while you can provide a fallback method for non compliant browsers. Meanwhile, AV1 has support from an endless list of companies, hardware support is coming, everyone seems to be really excited about this free, open source, royalty free format that's getting collaboration from half a dozen projects. AV1 image format is basically going to make a huge impact whenever it arrives.

That doesn't mean I think AV1 is the best image format. It certainly isn't, and has plenty of room for improvements. It has a problem with saturation, and loss of grainy / noisy micro details. However, if you want a tiny image file with an alpha channel, AV1 is going to be absolutely fantastic for that. Jpeg will still always be king of noisy/grainy images... but chances are, you won't care about that if you care about filesize.

The PIK format is interesting, as it appears to be true successor to JPEG and great at preserving micro details and noise/grain.... however, it has some artifacting issues around edges that I think need to be resolved... and even then, it's pretty much a doomed format since adoption rate will be a big whopping 0%, guaranteed. I'm not losing any sleep over this.

As soon as AV1 image format arrives, apples HEIF/HEIC image format is essentially doomed. Apple is a retarded ass company that somehow manages to make money, but I'm fairly confident their decision to push HEIC/HEIF is about the stupidest decision they've made yet.
Apple has always been a company that would rather design a better format than use someone else's, especially someone else's unfinished format. They had a large hand in creating HEIF, and some input in AVC & HEVC, of course they're going to use and push it. Given that it will likely be well over a year before any image format based on the still-unfinalized video format, possibly several years if they dally and bicker, those who want to change aren't going to hold onto unrealized hope forever. It's as likely that AV1 suffers the same fate as Vorbis vs MP3 & MP4 or VP8 vs AVC; too little too late. VP9 is afloat because of Google's clout, but hardly dominating the field. I hope AV1 will do better, but my prediction is that it'll always be the alternative, not the normal.

BPG and HEIF show that there's a lot more to it than just having an I-frame with extra color types; if they're smart they'd just re-use HEIF with the underlying codec swapped out, because it pretty much has every bit of flexibility and power that anyone would want, except that vector capabilities are pretty simple -- no SVG competitor there. It reminds me a lot of Photoshop's PSD, except open and based on MP4.
__________________
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. ~ Ed Howdershelt
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th April 2018, 06:13   #24  |  Link
iwod
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 729
Does anyone know why there isn't an image format based on H.264?
iwod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2018, 22:26   #25  |  Link
wiak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: somewhere north
Posts: 260
apng & png
__________________
Woah! Ninja?! http://nwgat.ninja/ (AV1 Overview)
"Not available in your region" has now been redefined as "Go Pirate, you filthy scum" Nwgat
wiak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th December 2018, 01:17   #26  |  Link
utack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 13
It is really sad how it is 8 years later and this old blogpost analyzing a WebP pre-release version still holds:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120319...x/archives/541
I have done some recent tests and at the same filesize WebP was doing clearly worse than mozjpeg in a bit more than half of my test images.
libvpx and libaom do the same, they just blur anything to get good PSNR metrics, unusable for human perception
utack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2018, 10:13   #27  |  Link
iwod
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by utack View Post
It is really sad how it is 8 years later and this old blogpost analyzing a WebP pre-release version still holds:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120319...x/archives/541
I have done some recent tests and at the same filesize WebP was doing clearly worse than mozjpeg in a bit more than half of my test images.
libvpx and libaom do the same, they just blur anything to get good PSNR metrics, unusable for human perception
Because I don't think there are much interest from companies. It seems as Bandwidth increases every year we have settled JPEG as baseline.

I am hoping we may finally see one from VVC.
iwod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 00:12   #28  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamaika View Post
Oh, and where is the HEIF software running under Windows correctly. What is on github simply doesn't work.
MediaInfo admittedly added images BPG to the software, but HEIF isn't interested. FFmpeg also.
Microsoft now has a beta HEVC/HEIF Media Foundation Transform on the Windows Store for $0.99.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Instant Video

My Compression Book

Amazon Instant Video is hiring! PM me if you're interested.
benwaggoner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 00:17   #29  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by utack View Post
It is really sad how it is 8 years later and this old blogpost analyzing a WebP pre-release version still holds:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120319...x/archives/541
I have done some recent tests and at the same filesize WebP was doing clearly worse than mozjpeg in a bit more than half of my test images.
libvpx and libaom do the same, they just blur anything to get good PSNR metrics, unusable for human perception
There never was a WebP psychovisually good enough to make it work dealing with the support. It takes the promise of a 2x improvement to really get people to start working towards adoption of new media technologies.

One thing that is important to note is that it is increasingly trivial for a big web site to have an image available in multiple formats, and deliver the appropriate one for a given browser/platform/window size. If you think about big social media and shopping sites, there are SO many pictures, the cost savings and particular page load time improvements of a 2x more efficient codec can be easily justified financially.

And 2x is just for natural images; much better results are seen with synthetic and hand-drawn images. I've been able to beat JPEG 20x with HEIF for comic book art, for example. JPEG just doesn't do sharp edges well. A nice thing about HEIF is that a single frame can mix natural and synthetic elements, being better than JPEG in some areas and better than PNG in others. Features like intra-frame prediction, transform skip, highly variable block and motion partition sizes, and lossless CUs are big advantages for text, screen captures, line art, etcetera.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Instant Video

My Compression Book

Amazon Instant Video is hiring! PM me if you're interested.
benwaggoner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 15:57   #30  |  Link
iwod
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
There never was a WebP psychovisually good enough to make it work dealing with the support. It takes the promise of a 2x improvement to really get people to start working towards adoption of new media technologies.

One thing that is important to note is that it is increasingly trivial for a big web site to have an image available in multiple formats, and deliver the appropriate one for a given browser/platform/window size. If you think about big social media and shopping sites, there are SO many pictures, the cost savings and particular page load time improvements of a 2x more efficient codec can be easily justified financially.

And 2x is just for natural images; much better results are seen with synthetic and hand-drawn images. I've been able to beat JPEG 20x with HEIF for comic book art, for example. JPEG just doesn't do sharp edges well. A nice thing about HEIF is that a single frame can mix natural and synthetic elements, being better than JPEG in some areas and better than PNG in others. Features like intra-frame prediction, transform skip, highly variable block and motion partition sizes, and lossless CUs are big advantages for text, screen captures, line art, etcetera.
I have always used BPG representing HEIF [1], are there any reason why HEIF would be better? I think both are based on x265?


[1] https://wyohknott.github.io/image-fo...&webm=s&webm=s
iwod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 16:21   #31  |  Link
Jamaika
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwod View Post
I have always used BPG representing HEIF [1], are there any reason why HEIF would be better? I think both are based on x265?
The creator of bpg have a plugin on the jctvc codec. I don't know if it will be possible to connect a newer jvetvcc.
It isn't known what codec is google pik.
The creators of HEIF bind high hopes with the family of av1 codecs.

Last edited by Jamaika; Yesterday at 18:54.
Jamaika is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 17:21.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.