
HEVC over Twitter - bratao
http://www.parabolaresearch.com/blog/2013-10-21-hevc-over-twitter.html
======
Danieru
"[HEVC is] comparable to DLI"

I'm not sure what images they're looking at but from my end they are not
comparable. Not at all. You cannot just pretend the giant mosaic tiling is not
there.

My annoyance is of course at the meta. Right now those with a shoe in the game
are gearing up to push H.265. Remember a year or so back during the fight over
H.264 in web video? Some commentators pointed out that the patents covering
H.264 will expire in due time.

That will never happen. Proprietary versus open source is not H.264 versus
WebM. Both sides will innovate and improve and if we do not make an effort
towards open source it will not fall into our lap.

The proprietary side is taking those hundreds of millions in ill-gotten
licensing fees and pouring it back into the next generation so they can
continue to seek rent. Meanwhile those fighting for our rights are getting
along on shoe-string budgets and buckets of passion.

If we want an open future we need to support those who have our best interests
in mind.

~~~
rayiner
> The proprietary side is taking those hundreds of millions in ill-gotten
> licensing fees and pouring it back into the next generation so they can
> continue to seek rent. Meanwhile those fighting for our rights are getting
> along on shoe-string budgets and buckets of passion.

Rent-seeking is defined as manipulating the political environment to achieve
economic gain without creating value. The process you yourself describe isn't
at all rent-seeking. If the end-result, H.265, is better than open source
alternatives, then clearly value is being created. What you're describing, in
your own words, is the use of licensing to fund capital-intensive research
that cannot be adequately performed without capital investment (on "shoe-
string budgets.").

Your central complaint seems to be that MPEG/VCEG isn't giving away the fruits
of their capital-intensive research for free. Well I hate to break it to you,
but neither is Google (WebM). Indeed, I think its far better what MPEG is
doing: simply taking money in return for a license, as opposed to what Google
is doing, which is subsidizing WebM development with their advertising empire.

~~~
pgeorgi
If MPEG-LA and their collaborators were simply taking money in return for a
license, all would be well. They're not.

"Vorbis|Theora|VP8|Opus|... is infringing on tons of patents, with no
indemnification" is an infamous part of their routine, even though they never
point to patents nor provide indemnification themselves (which is impossible
when it comes to patents).

With such FUD in place, it's not about being "better than open source
alternatives" anymore. For that they can go die in a fire.

------
mherdeg
FYI, you can fit about 4370 bits in a Tweet (
[https://blogs.oracle.com/ksplice/entry/1st_international_lon...](https://blogs.oracle.com/ksplice/entry/1st_international_longest_tweet_contest)
,
[https://blogs.oracle.com/ksplice/entry/the_1st_international...](https://blogs.oracle.com/ksplice/entry/the_1st_international_longest_tweet)
).

------
0x09
I thought it would be interesting to see how transmitting only the 251 (byte-
size) highest-energy coefficients in the entire image would fare, which is
somewhat of an idealization of the method used by the codecs in this
comparison, but the result is not visually as good as either:

[http://i.imgur.com/TJaMs0f.png](http://i.imgur.com/TJaMs0f.png)

This is a cheap imitation of an encoder: there is no entropy coding, but
neither is there consideration for scan order, so there are some biases for
and against.

Assuming an entropy coder could reduce the bits to 67% there's a little
improvement:

[http://i.imgur.com/ILY23uM.png](http://i.imgur.com/ILY23uM.png)

Comparing them, it seems the block partitioning and filtering employed by DLI
and H.265 become much more perceptually important than the raw mathematical
effectiveness of the transform under bit starved rates like this.

------
aidenn0
I can't be the only one who thought that the DLI image was significantly
better than the HEVC image (see the last set of 3 images in the article)?

------
garblegarble
That's pretty neat, although it's unfortunate they don't explain what's
causing the edges around the right side of the face, I assume it's some
interesting adaptive macroblock division - any HEVC-wise people know?

