Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (5798)

• Revisiting the Belco Alpha-400

  26 août 2010, par Multimedia Mike — General

  Relieved of the primary FATE maintenance duties, I decided to dust off my MIPS-based Belco Alpha-400 and try to get it doing FATE cycles. And just as I was about to get FATE running, I saw that Mans already got his MIPS-based Popcorn Hour device to run FATE. But here are my notes anyway.

  
  
  

  Getting A Prompt
  For my own benefit, I made a PDF to remind me precisely how to get a root prompt on the Alpha-400. The ‘jailbreak’ expression seems a little juvenile to me, but it seems to be in vogue right now.

  alpha-400-jailbreak.pdf

  Toolchain
  When I last tinkered with the Alpha-400, I was trying to build a toolchain that could build binaries to run on the unit’s MIPS chip, to no avail. Sometime last year, MichaelK put together x86_32-hosted toolchains that are able to build mipsel 32-bit binaries for Linux 2.4 and 2.6. The Alpha-400 uses a 2.4 kernel and the corresponding toolchain works famously for building current FFmpeg (--disable-devices is necessary for building).

  FATE Samples
  Next problem : Making the FATE suite available to the Alpha-400. I copied all of the FATE suite samples onto a VFAT-formatted SD card. The filename case is not preserved for all files which confounds me since it is preserved in other cases. I tried formatting the card for ext3 but the Alpha-400 would not mount it, even though /proc/filesystems lists ext3 (supporting an older version of ext3 ?).

  Alternative : Copy all of the FATE samples to the device’s rootfs. Space will be a little tight, though. Then again, there is over 600 MB of space free ; I misread earlier and thought there were only 300 MB free.

  Remote Execution
  To perform FATE cycles on a remote device, it helps to be able to SSH into that remote device. I don’t even want to know how complicated it would be to build OpenSSH for the device. However, the last time I brought up this topic, I learned about a lighter weight SSH replacement called Dropbear. It turns out that Dropbear runs great on this MIPS computer.

  Running FATE Remotely
  I thought all the pieces would be in place to run FATE at this point. However, there is one more issue : Running FATE on a remote system requires that the host and the target are sharing a filesystem somehow. My personal favorite remote filesystem method is sshfs which is supposed to work wherever there is an SSH server. That’s not entirely true, though– sshfs also requires sftp-server to be installed on the server side, a program that Dropbear does not currently provide.

  I’m not even going to think about getting Samba or NFS server software installed on the Alpha-400. According to the unit’s /proc/filesystems file, nfs is a supported filesystem. I hate setting up NFS but may see if I can get that working anyway.

  Residual Weirdness
  The unit comes with the venerable Busybox program (BusyBox v1.4.1 (2007-06-01 20:37:18 CST) multi-call binary) for most of its standard command line utilities. I noticed a quirk where BusyBox’s md5sum gives weird hex characters. This might be a known/fixed issue.

  Another item is that the Alpha-400′s /dev/null file only has rwxr-xr-x per default. This caused trouble when I first tried to scp using Dropbear using a newly-created, unprivileged user.

• IJG swings again, and misses

  1er février 2010, par Mans — Multimedia

  Earlier this month the IJG unleashed version 8 of its ubiquitous libjpeg library on the world. Eager to try out the “major breakthrough in image coding technology” promised in the README file accompanying v7, I downloaded the release. A glance at the README file suggests something major indeed is afoot :

  Version 8.0 is the first release of a new generation JPEG standard to overcome the limitations of the original JPEG specification.

  The text also hints at the existence of a document detailing these marvellous new features, and a Google search later a copy has found its way onto my monitor. As I read, however, my state of mind shifts from an initial excited curiosity, through bewilderment and disbelief, finally arriving at pure merriment.

  Already on the first page it becomes clear no new JPEG standard in fact exists. All we have is an unsolicited proposal sent to the ITU-T by members of the IJG. Realising that even the most brilliant of inventions must start off as mere proposals, I carry on reading. The summary informs me that I am about to witness the introduction of three extensions to the T.81 JPEG format :

  1. An alternative coefficient scan sequence for DCT coefficient serialization
  2. A SmartScale extension in the Start-Of-Scan (SOS) marker segment
  3. A Frame Offset definition in or in addition to the Start-Of-Frame (SOF) marker segment

  Together these three extensions will, it is promised, “bring DCT based JPEG back to the forefront of state-of-the-art image coding technologies.”

  Alternative scan

  The first of the proposed extensions introduces an alternative DCT coefficient scan sequence to be used in place of the zigzag scan employed in most block transform based codecs.

  

  Alternative scan sequence

  The advantage of this scan would be that combined with the existing progressive mode, it simplifies decoding of an initial low-resolution image which is enhanced through subsequent passes. The author of the document calls this scheme “image-pyramid/hierarchical multi-resolution coding.” It is not immediately obvious to me how this constitutes even a small advance in image coding technology.

  At this point I am beginning to suspect that our friend from the IJG has been trapped in a half-world between interlaced GIF images transmitted down noisy phone lines and today’s inferno of SVC, MVC, and other buzzwords.

  (Not so) SmartScale

  Disguised behind this camel-cased moniker we encounter a method which, we are told, will provide better image quality at high compression ratios. The author has combined two well-known (to us) properties in a (to him) clever way.

  The first property concerns the perceived impact of different types of distortion in an image. When encoding with JPEG, as the quantiser is increased, the decoded image becomes ever more blocky. At a certain point, a better subjective visual quality can be achieved by down-sampling the image before encoding it, thus allowing a lower quantiser to be used. If the decoded image is scaled back up to the original size, the unpleasant, blocky appearance is replaced with a smooth blur.

  The second property belongs to the DCT where, as we all know, the top-left (DC) coefficient is the average of the entire block, its neighbours represent the lowest frequency components etc. A top-left-aligned subset of the coefficient block thus represents a low-resolution version of the full block in the spatial domain.

  In his flash of genius, our hero came up with the idea of using the DCT for down-scaling the image. Unfortunately, he appears to possess precious little knowledge of sampling theory and human visual perception. Any block-based resampling will inevitably produce sharp artefacts along the block edges. The human visual system is particularly sensitive to sharp edges, so this is one of the most unwanted types of distortion in an encoded image.

  Despite the obvious flaws in this approach, I decided to give it a try. After all, the software is already written, allowing downscaling by factors of 8/8..16.

  Using a 1280×720 test image, I encoded it with each of the nine scaling options, from unity to half size, each time adjusting the quality parameter for a final encoded file size of no more than 200000 bytes. The following table presents the encoded file size, the libjpeg quality parameter used, and the SSIM metric for each of the images.

  Scale	Size	Quality	SSIM
  8/8	198462	59	0.940
  8/9	196337	70	0.936
  8/10	196133	79	0.934
  8/11	197179	84	0.927
  8/12	193872	89	0.915
  8/13	197153	92	0.914
  8/14	188334	94	0.899
  8/15	198911	96	0.886
  8/16	197190	97	0.869

  Although the smaller images allowed a higher quality setting to be used, the SSIM value drops significantly. Numbers may of course be misleading, but the images below speak for themselves. These are cut-outs from the full image, the original on the left, unscaled JPEG-compressed in the middle, and JPEG with 8/16 scaling to the right.

  

  

  Looking at these images, I do not need to hesitate before picking the JPEG variant I prefer.

  Frame offset

  The third and final extension proposed is quite simple and also quite pointless : a top-left cropping to be applied to the decoded image. The alleged utility of this feature would be to enable lossless cropping of a JPEG image. In a typical image workflow, however, JPEG is only used for the final published version, so the need for this feature appears quite far-fetched.

  The grand finale

  Throughout the text, the author makes references to “the fundamental DCT property for image representation.” In his own words :

  This property was found by the author during implementation of the new DCT scaling features and is after his belief one of the most important discoveries in digital image coding after releasing the JPEG standard in 1992.

  The secret is to be revealed in an annex to the main text. This annex quotes in full a post by the author to the comp.dsp Usenet group in a thread with the subject why DCT. Reading the entire thread proves quite amusing. A few excerpts follow.

  The actual reason is much simpler, and therefore apparently very difficult to recognize by complicated-thinking people.

  Here is the explanation :

  What are people doing when they have a bunch of images and want a quick preview ? They use thumbnails ! What are thumbnails ? Thumbnails are small downscaled versions of the original image ! If you want more details of the image, you can zoom in stepwise by enlarging (upscaling) the image.

  So with proper understanding of the fundamental DCT property, the MPEG folks could make their videos more scalable, but, as in the case of JPEG, they are unable to recognize this simple but basic property, unfortunately, and pursue rather inferior approaches in actual developments.

  These are just phrases, and they don’t explain anything. But this is typical for the current state in this field : The relevant people ignore and deny the true reasons, and thus they turn in a circle and no progress is being made.

  However, there are dark forces in action today which ignore and deny any fruitful advances in this field. That is the reason that we didn’t see any progress in JPEG for more than a decade, and as long as those forces dominate, we will see more confusion and less enlightenment. The truth is always simple, and the DCT *is* simple, but this fact is suppressed by established people who don’t want to lose their dubious position.

  I believe a trip to the Total Perspective Vortex may be in order. Perhaps his tin-foil hat will save him.

• FFMPEG thumb creation error

  12 décembre 2012, par Paul

  I've installed FFMPEG and using FFMPEG Ultimate, a class I downloaded to create thumbnail images of FLV's.

  It has been working perfectly even after upgrading to the latest release of FFMPEG last month. However it has suddenly stopped working. I had it working at 12:00 today (last thumb created at 12:02) then suddenly 30 mins later it has stopped.

  The other strange thing is I can retrieve FLV meta data using the FFMPEG Ultimate class, which leads me to believe that FFMPEG is working, but creating images is not working...

  Can anyone give any pointers as to how to test and diagnose FFMPEG, also can it suddenly crash for no apparent reason ? If it does how do you re-start it ?

  Thanks in advance