<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Re: [x264-devel] Who washed my video? x264 vs x265 ‘placebo’ comparison</TITLE>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE>
BLOCKQUOTE {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 2em
}
OL {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px
}
UL {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px
}
DIV.FoxDiv20140225112020798261 {
COLOR: #000000
}
P {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px
}
BODY {
LINE-HEIGHT: 1.5; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
</STYLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.7600.16968"></HEAD>
<BODY style="MARGIN: 10px">
<DIV>yep.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>the point that we focus on is low-bitrtate. We want to found the principle
of <FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; FONT-SIZE: 12pt" size=1
face="">eye-perceived </FONT>figure quailty.</DIV>
<DIV>Have you get some <A href="app:ds:mathematical" target="">mathematical</A>
<A href="app:ds:method" target="">method</A> or judgement indictor for
this?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>thanks</DIV>
<HR style="WIDTH: 210px; HEIGHT: 1px" align=left color=#b5c4df SIZE=1>
<DIV><SPAN>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV>zhou2090@126.com</DIV></DIV></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; PADDING-LEFT: 0cm; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<DIV
style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 8px; PADDING-LEFT: 8px; PADDING-RIGHT: 8px; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma; BACKGROUND: #efefef; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12px; PADDING-TOP: 8px">
<DIV><B>发件人：</B> <A href="mailto:vano@mail.mipt.ru">Ivan Pozdeev</A></DIV>
<DIV><B>发送时间：</B> 2014-02-25 10:10</DIV>
<DIV><B>收件人：</B> <A href="mailto:x264-devel@videolan.org">Mailing list for
x264 developers</A></DIV>
<DIV><B>主题：</B> Re: [x264-devel]Who washed my video? x264 vs x265 ‘placebo’
comparison</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: white" class=FoxDiv20140225112020798261><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt">Of course, in this case, it
was estimated "by eye" (literally)<BR>and thus is strictly personal. The best
the OP could do is point this out clearly.<BR><BR>There are, however, formal
methods out there that make some assumptions on what<BR>an "eye-perceived
quality" is (lossy image compression algorithms are based on these).<BR><BR>What
point are you trying to make? Do you disagree with OP's
judgement?<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: </SPAN><A
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'courier new'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"
href="mailto:zhou2090@126.com">zhou2090@126.com</A><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> <</SPAN><A
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'courier new'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"
href="mailto:zhou2090@126.com">zhou2090@126.com</A><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt">><BR>Sent: Tuesday,
February 25, 2014 5:27<BR>To: Mailing list for x264 developers <</SPAN><A
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'courier new'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"
href="mailto:x264-devel@videolan.org">x264-devel@videolan.org</A><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt">><BR>Cc: <BR>Subject:
[x264-devel] Who washed my video? x264 vs x265 ‘placebo’
comparison<BR><BR> <BR>hi,<BR> <BR><SPAN style="COLOR: #ff0000">"Hi,
I don't compare PSNR because it's inconsistent with human
eye <BR>perception. Even the structural similarity index is not as good as
human <BR>eyes."<BR> <BR><SPAN style="COLOR: #000000">I totoaly agree
with what you say. Now I'm intersting with the method how to evaluate the human
eyes quality.<BR><SPAN style="COLOR: #ff0000"> <BR><SPAN
style="COLOR: #000000">thanks.<BR> <BR>
<HR SIZE=2 noShade>
<SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'verdana'; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">zhou2090@126.com<BR><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> <BR><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'tahoma'"><B>From:</B> </SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><A
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'tahoma'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"
href="mailto:darkbasic@linuxsystems.it">Niccolò Belli</A><BR><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'tahoma'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"><B>Date:</B> 2014-02-24
19:57<BR><B>To:</B> </SPAN><A style="FONT-FAMILY: 'tahoma'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"
href="mailto:x264-devel@videolan.org">x264-devel</A><BR><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'tahoma'; FONT-SIZE: 9pt"><B>Subject:</B> Re:
[x264-devel]Who washed my video? x264 vs x265 ‘placebo’ comparison<BR><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'">Il 24/02/2014 07:15, chen ha scritto:<BR>>
Hi,<BR>> I see your blog, you just compare filesize, no PSNR, SSIM and
more.<BR> <BR>Hi, I don't compare PSNR because it's inconsistent with human
eye <BR>perception. Even the structural similarity index is not as good as
human <BR>eyes.<BR> <BR>> For decode speed, I think H264 optimize
more than 10 years, but H265 is<BR>> shorter time, it is not a big
problem.<BR> <BR>I was serious, I'm impressed by the current
encoding/decoding speeds. <BR>Especially compared to VP9 which seems to
encode using a wooden abacus <BR>(~1.4 minutes per
frame).<BR> <BR>> btw: There have some decoder double speed than
ffmpeg.<BR>> Best regards,<BR>> Min<BR> <BR>Like Mainconcept? I don't
like proprietary software.<BR> <BR>Niccolò<BR> <BR>> At 2014-02-24
04:32:54,"Niccolò Belli" <darkbasic@linuxsystems.it> wrote:<BR>>
>Hi,<BR>> >I did a quick x264 vs x265 comparison in my
blog, hopefully someone<BR>> >will be intersted watching it:<BR>>
>http://www.linuxsystems.it/2014/02/washed-video-x264-vs-x265-placebo-comparison/<BR>>
><BR>> >Cheers,<BR>>
>Niccolò<BR>-- <BR>http://www.linuxsystems.it<BR> <BR>_______________________________________________<BR>x264-devel
mailing
list<BR>x264-devel@videolan.org<BR>https://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x264-devel
</DIV></DIV></SPAN></SPAN></BODY></HTML>