[x264-devel] I444 support

[James Gardiner]

Thank you the clarification Neil,
It is just that I had not considered or heard about M-JPG2000 being used
as a transmition/streaming codec.

I am mainly interested in H.264 as a hi-quality distribution codec for
cinema type application that is an alternative to DCI (JPEG2000).
H.264 High Profile 4:4:4 (With 10/12 bit support and up to 4k
resolution) sounds like a good alternative with some advanyages over
JPEG2000, mainly being high precevible quality and colour depth at much
lower bitrates.

Reading comments from the list, it appear that this is the general
conclusion.  Still, I would be interested in knowing exactly how much
better the compression would be for H.264 over JPEG2000.  I expect I
will not find out until I get my hands on an H.264 implementation that
supports it.

Currently I know of two different companies working on releasing this
feature before 1st half this year.

Thanks,
James

 

-----Original Message-----
From: x264-devel-bounces at videolan.org
[mailto:x264-devel-bounces at videolan.org] On Behalf Of Neil Woodall
Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2008 11:00 AM
To: Mailing list for x264 developers
Subject: Re: [x264-devel] I444 support

Transmission errors would be corruption of data. In a broadcast mode  
it would not always be possible to ask the source to resend the data.

H.264 has a series of mechanisms to improve error resiliency. One of  
the methods is to include redundant picture frames and with redundant  
slices. Another would be to simply force a larger amount of the blocks  
to be intra coded.

The point that I was trying to make is that if you have enough  
bandwidth for M-JPEG2000, then you probably have enough bandwidth to  
make sure that the H.264 is more resilient to errors than is normally  
the case.


On Jan 14, 2008, at 2:03 PM, James Gardiner wrote:

>
> Can you please qualify,
> On this topic of 444 and quality compared to JPEG2000.
> Can you be more clear on what " transmission errors are"?
> I took them to mean in accuracies compared to the original.
> Then in other posts, it leads me to think you are talking about
> Real transmission errors as in what is characteristic of DVB-T or
> satellite.
>
> However, I am not sure how "transmitting them twice" actually means
> considering this.
>
> If you have time to clarify, this would be appreciated.
>
> James
> _______________________________________________
> x264-devel mailing list
> x264-devel at videolan.org
> http://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x264-devel

_______________________________________________
x264-devel mailing list
x264-devel at videolan.org
http://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x264-devel