[x264-devel] I444 support

[Neil Woodall]

The study determined the bitrates required for visually lossless  
encoding (40db PSNR).

HDTV over UWB: wireless video streaming trials and quality of
service analysis

I was just looking at the paper. At one point I shows MJPEG-2000 as  
being better, but in the actual tests, it seems  that H.264 is better  
when you don't have transmission errors.

The 3:1 is probably from motion estimation. The DWT is better than DCT  
for compression, but it doesn't make-up for motion estimation.

Neil

On Jan 14, 2008, at 1:27 PM, Loren Merritt wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Neil Woodall wrote:
>
>> I think the issue with respect to JPEG 2000 is that wavelet
>> compression will work much better on natural scenes than a DCT based
>> CODEC. [...] The study I saw showed a 3:1 difference in compression
>> ratio, so even with double sending the data, H.264 would be more
>> efficient than JPEG2000 at a given quality level.
>
> Wait, are you arguing that H.264 compresses 3x as well as JPEG2000, or
> vice versa? Or are you arguing that MC-DWT codecs like Snow and Dirac
> could beat H.264 but JPEG2000 can't?
>
> --Loren Merritt
> _______________________________________________
> x264-devel mailing list
> x264-devel at videolan.org
> http://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x264-devel