Recherche avancée

Médias (0)

Mot : - Tags -/organisation

Aucun média correspondant à vos critères n’est disponible sur le site.

Autres articles (39)

  • Websites made ​​with MediaSPIP

    2 mai 2011, par

    This page lists some websites based on MediaSPIP.

  • Creating farms of unique websites

    13 avril 2011, par

    MediaSPIP platforms can be installed as a farm, with a single "core" hosted on a dedicated server and used by multiple websites.
    This allows (among other things) : implementation costs to be shared between several different projects / individuals rapid deployment of multiple unique sites creation of groups of like-minded sites, making it possible to browse media in a more controlled and selective environment than the major "open" (...)

  • Mise à disposition des fichiers

    14 avril 2011, par

    Par défaut, lors de son initialisation, MediaSPIP ne permet pas aux visiteurs de télécharger les fichiers qu’ils soient originaux ou le résultat de leur transformation ou encodage. Il permet uniquement de les visualiser.
    Cependant, il est possible et facile d’autoriser les visiteurs à avoir accès à ces documents et ce sous différentes formes.
    Tout cela se passe dans la page de configuration du squelette. Il vous faut aller dans l’espace d’administration du canal, et choisir dans la navigation (...)

Sur d’autres sites (8079)

  • Changes to the WebM Open Source License

    5 juin 2010, par noreply@blogger.com (John Luther)

    You’ll see on the WebM license page and in our source code repositories that we’ve made a small change to our open source license. There were a couple of issues that popped up after we released WebM at Google I/O a couple weeks ago, specifically around how the patent clause was written.

    As it was originally written, if a patent action was brought against Google, the patent license terminated. This provision itself is not unusual in an OSS license, and similar provisions exist in the 2nd Apache License and in version 3 of the GPL. The twist was that ours terminated "any" rights and not just rights to the patents, which made our license GPLv3 and GPLv2 incompatible. Also, in doing this, we effectively created a potentially new open source copyright license, something we are loath to do.

    Using patent language borrowed from both the Apache and GPLv3 patent clauses, in this new iteration of the patent clause we’ve decoupled patents from copyright, thus preserving the pure BSD nature of the copyright license. This means we are no longer creating a new open source copyright license, and the patent grant can exist on its own. Additionally, we have updated the patent grant language to make it clearer that the grant includes the right to modify the code and give it to others. (We’ve updated the licensing FAQ to reflect these changes as well.)

    We’ve also added a definition for the "this implementation" language, to make that more clear.

    Thanks for your patience as we worked through this, and we hope you like, enjoy and (most importantly) use WebM and join with us in creating more freedom online. We had a lot of help on these changes, so thanks to our friends in open source and free software who traded many emails, often at odd hours, with us.

    Chris DiBona is the Open Source Programs Manager at Google.

  • Announcing the world’s fastest VP8 decoder : ffvp8

    24 juillet 2010, par Dark Shikari — ffmpeg, google, speed, VP8

    Back when I originally reviewed VP8, I noted that the official decoder, libvpx, was rather slow. While there was no particular reason that it should be much faster than a good H.264 decoder, it shouldn’t have been that much slower either ! So, I set out with Ronald Bultje and David Conrad to make a better one in FFmpeg. This one would be community-developed and free from the beginning, rather than the proprietary code-dump that was libvpx. A few weeks ago the decoder was complete enough to be bit-exact with libvpx, making it the first independent free implementation of a VP8 decoder. Now, with the first round of optimizations complete, it should be ready for primetime. I’ll go into some detail about the development process, but first, let’s get to the real meat of this post : the benchmarks.

    We tested on two 1080p clips : Parkjoy, a live-action 1080p clip, and the Sintel trailer, a CGI 1080p clip. Testing was done using “time ffmpeg -vcodec libvpx or vp8 -i input -vsync 0 -an -f null -”. We all used the latest SVN FFmpeg at the time of this posting ; the last revision optimizing the VP8 decoder was r24471.

    Parkjoy graphSintel graph

    As these benchmarks show, ffvp8 is clearly much faster than libvpx, particularly on 64-bit. It’s even faster by a large margin on Atom, despite the fact that we haven’t even begun optimizing for it. In many cases, ffvp8′s extra speed can make the difference between a video that plays and one that doesn’t, especially in modern browsers with software compositing engines taking up a lot of CPU time. Want to get faster playback of VP8 videos ? The next versions of FFmpeg-based players, like VLC, will include ffvp8. Want to get faster playback of WebM in your browser ? Lobby your browser developers to use ffvp8 instead of libvpx. I expect Chrome to switch first, as they already use libavcodec for most of their playback system.

    Keep in mind ffvp8 is not “done” — we will continue to improve it and make it faster. We still have a number of optimizations in the pipeline that aren’t committed yet.

    Developing ffvp8

    The initial challenge, primarily pioneered by David and Ronald, was constructing the core decoder and making it bit-exact to libvpx. This was rather challenging, especially given the lack of a real spec. Many parts of the spec were outright misleading and contradicted libvpx itself. It didn’t help that the suite of official conformance tests didn’t even cover all the features used by the official encoder ! We’ve already started adding our own conformance tests to deal with this. But I’ve complained enough in past posts about the lack of a spec ; let’s get onto the gritty details.

    The next step was adding SIMD assembly for all of the important DSP functions. VP8′s motion compensation and deblocking filter are by far the most CPU-intensive parts, much the same as in H.264. Unlike H.264, the deblocking filter relies on a lot of internal saturation steps, which are free in SIMD but costly in a normal C implementation, making the plain C code even slower. Of course, none of this is a particularly large problem ; any sane video decoder has all this stuff in SIMD.

    I tutored Ronald in x86 SIMD and wrote most of the motion compensation, intra prediction, and some inverse transforms. Ronald wrote the rest of the inverse transforms and a bit of the motion compensation. He also did the most difficult part : the deblocking filter. Deblocking filters are always a bit difficult because every one is different. Motion compensation, by comparison, is usually very similar regardless of video format ; a 6-tap filter is a 6-tap filter, and most of the variation going on is just the choice of numbers to multiply by.

    The biggest challenge in an SIMD deblocking filter is to avoid unpacking, that is, going from 8-bit to 16-bit. Many operations in deblocking filters would naively appear to require more than 8-bit precision. A simple example in the case of x86 is abs(a-b), where a and b are 8-bit unsigned integers. The result of “a-b” requires a 9-bit signed integer (it can be anywhere from -255 to 255), so it can’t fit in 8-bit. But this is quite possible to do without unpacking : (satsub(a,b) | satsub(b,a)), where “satsub” performs a saturating subtract on the two values. If the value is positive, it yields the result ; if the value is negative, it yields zero. Oring the two together yields the desired result. This requires 4 ops on x86 ; unpacking would probably require at least 10, including the unpack and pack steps.

    After the SIMD came optimizing the C code, which still took a significant portion of the total runtime. One of my biggest optimizations was adding aggressive “smart” prefetching to reduce cache misses. ffvp8 prefetches the reference frames (PREVIOUS, GOLDEN, and ALTREF)… but only the ones which have been used reasonably often this frame. This lets us prefetch everything we need without prefetching things that we probably won’t use. libvpx very often encodes frames that almost never (but not quite never) use GOLDEN or ALTREF, so this optimization greatly reduces time spent prefetching in a lot of real videos. There are of course countless other optimizations we made that are too long to list here as well, such as David’s entropy decoder optimizations. I’d also like to thank Eli Friedman for his invaluable help in benchmarking a lot of these changes.

    What next ? Altivec (PPC) assembly is almost nonexistent, with the only functions being David’s motion compensation code. NEON (ARM) is completely nonexistent : we’ll need that to be fast on mobile devices as well. Of course, all this will come in due time — and as always — patches welcome !

    Appendix : the raw numbers

    Here’s the raw numbers (in fps) for the graphs at the start of this post, with standard error values :

    Core i7 620QM (1.6Ghz), Windows 7, 32-bit :
    Parkjoy ffvp8 : 44.58 0.44
    Parkjoy libvpx : 33.06 0.23
    Sintel ffvp8 : 74.26 1.18
    Sintel libvpx : 56.11 0.96

    Core i5 520M (2.4Ghz), Linux, 64-bit :
    Parkjoy ffvp8 : 68.29 0.06
    Parkjoy libvpx : 41.06 0.04
    Sintel ffvp8 : 112.38 0.37
    Sintel libvpx : 69.64 0.09

    Core 2 T9300 (2.5Ghz), Mac OS X 10.6.4, 64-bit :
    Parkjoy ffvp8 : 54.09 0.02
    Parkjoy libvpx : 33.68 0.01
    Sintel ffvp8 : 87.54 0.03
    Sintel libvpx : 52.74 0.04

    Core Duo (2Ghz), Mac OS X 10.6.4, 32-bit :
    Parkjoy ffvp8 : 21.31 0.02
    Parkjoy libvpx : 17.96 0.00
    Sintel ffvp8 : 41.24 0.01
    Sintel libvpx : 29.65 0.02

    Atom N270 (1.6Ghz), Linux, 32-bit :
    Parkjoy ffvp8 : 15.29 0.01
    Parkjoy libvpx : 12.46 0.01
    Sintel ffvp8 : 26.87 0.05
    Sintel libvpx : 20.41 0.02

  • Inside WebM Technology : VP8 Intra and Inter Prediction

    20 juillet 2010, par noreply@blogger.com (Lou Quillio)
    Continuing our series on WebM technology, I will discuss the use of prediction methods in the VP8 video codec, with special attention to the TM_PRED and SPLITMV modes, which are unique to VP8.

    First, some background. To encode a video frame, block-based codecs such as VP8 first divide the frame into smaller segments called macroblocks. Within each macroblock, the encoder can predict redundant motion and color information based on previously processed blocks. The redundant data can be subtracted from the block, resulting in more efficient compression.

    Image by Fido Factor, licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License.
    Based on a work at www.flickr.com

    A VP8 encoder uses two classes of prediction :
    • Intra prediction uses data within a single video frame
    • Inter prediction uses data from previously encoded frames
    The residual signal data is then encoded using other techniques, such as transform coding.

    VP8 Intra Prediction Modes
    VP8 intra prediction modes are used with three types of macroblocks :
    • 4x4 luma
    • 16x16 luma
    • 8x8 chroma
    Four common intra prediction modes are shared by these macroblocks :
    • H_PRED (horizontal prediction). Fills each column of the block with a copy of the left column, L.
    • V_PRED (vertical prediction). Fills each row of the block with a copy of the above row, A.
    • DC_PRED (DC prediction). Fills the block with a single value using the average of the pixels in the row above A and the column to the left of L.
    • TM_PRED (TrueMotion prediction). A mode that gets its name from a compression technique developed by On2 Technologies. In addition to the row A and column L, TM_PRED uses the pixel P above and to the left of the block. Horizontal differences between pixels in A (starting from P) are propagated using the pixels from L to start each row.
    For 4x4 luma blocks, there are six additional intra modes similar to V_PRED and H_PRED, but correspond to predicting pixels in different directions. These modes are outside the scope of this post, but if you want to learn more see the VP8 Bitstream Guide.

    As mentioned above, the TM_PRED mode is unique to VP8. The following figure uses an example 4x4 block of pixels to illustrate how the TM_PRED mode works :
    Where C, As and Ls represent reconstructed pixel values from previously coded blocks, and X00 through X33 represent predicted values for the current block. TM_PRED uses the following equation to calculate Xij :

    Xij = Li + Aj - C (i, j=0, 1, 2, 3)

    Although the above example uses a 4x4 block, the TM_PRED mode for 8x8 and 16x16 blocks works in the same fashion.
    TM_PRED is one of the more frequently used intra prediction modes in VP8, and for common video sequences it is typically used by 20% to 45% of all blocks that are intra coded. Overall, together with other intra prediction modes, TM_PRED helps VP8 to achieve very good compression efficiency, especially for key frames, which can only use intra modes (key frames by their very nature cannot refer to previously encoded frames).

    VP8 Inter Prediction Modes

    In VP8, inter prediction modes are used only on inter frames (non-key frames). For any VP8 inter frame, there are typically three previously coded reference frames that can be used for prediction. A typical inter prediction block is constructed using a motion vector to copy a block from one of the three frames. The motion vector points to the location of a pixel block to be copied. In most video compression schemes, a good portion of the bits are spent on encoding motion vectors ; the portion can be especially large for video encoded at lower datarates.

    Like previous VPx codecs, VP8 encodes motion vectors very efficiently by reusing vectors from neighboring macroblocks (a macroblock includes one 16x16 luma block and two 8x8 chroma blocks). VP8 uses a similar strategy in the overall design of inter prediction modes. For example, the prediction modes "NEAREST" and "NEAR" make use of last and second-to-last, non-zero motion vectors from neighboring macroblocks. These inter prediction modes can be used in combination with any of the three different reference frames.

    In addition, VP8 has a very sophisticated, flexible inter prediction mode called SPLITMV. This mode was designed to enable flexible partitioning of a macroblock into sub-blocks to achieve better inter prediction. SPLITMV is very useful when objects within a macroblock have different motion characteristics. Within a macroblock coded using SPLITMV mode, each sub-block can have its own motion vector. Similar to the strategy of reusing motion vectors at the macroblock level, a sub-block can also use motion vectors from neighboring sub-blocks above or left to the current block. This strategy is very flexible and can effectively encode any shape of sub-macroblock partitioning, and does so efficiently. Here is an example of a macroblock with 16x16 luma pixels that is partitioned to 16 4x4 blocks :


    where New represents a 4x4 bock coded with a new motion vector, and Left and Above represent a 4x4 block coded using the motion vector from the left and above, respectively. This example effectively partitions the 16x16 macroblock into 3 different segments with 3 different motion vectors (represented below by 1, 2 and 3) :


    Through effective use of intra and inter prediction modes, WebM encoder implementations can achieve great compression quality on a wide range of source material. If you want to delve further into VP8 prediction modes, read the VP8 Bitstream Guide or examine the reconintra.c and rdopt.c files in the VP8 source tree.

    Yaowu Xu, Ph.D. is a codec engineer at Google.