Recherche avancée

Médias (91)

Autres articles (70)

  • 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" (...)

  • Other interesting software

    13 avril 2011, par

    We don’t claim to be the only ones doing what we do ... and especially not to assert claims to be the best either ... What we do, we just try to do it well and getting better ...
    The following list represents softwares that tend to be more or less as MediaSPIP or that MediaSPIP tries more or less to do the same, whatever ...
    We don’t know them, we didn’t try them, but you can take a peek.
    Videopress
    Website : http://videopress.com/
    License : GNU/GPL v2
    Source code : (...)

Sur d’autres sites (9241)

  • Minimal Understanding of VP8′s Forward Transform

    16 novembre 2010, par Multimedia Mike — VP8

    Regarding my toy VP8 encoder, Pengvado mentioned in the comments of my last post, “x264 looks perfect using only i16x16 DC mode. You must be doing something wrong in computing residual or fdct or quantization.” This makes a lot of sense. The encoder generates a series of elements which describe how to reconstruct the original image. Intra block reconstruction takes into consideration the following elements :



    I have already verified that both my encoder and FFmpeg’s VP8 decoder agree precisely on how to reconstruct blocks based on the predictors, coefficients, and quantizers. Thus, if the decoded image still looks crazy, the elements the encoder is generating to describe the image must be wrong.

    So I started studying the forward DCT, which I had cribbed wholesale from the original libvpx 0.9.0 source code. It should be noted that the formal VP8 spec only defines the inverse transform process, not the forward process. I was using a version designated as the “short” version, vs. the “fast” version. Then I looked at the 0.9.5 FDCT. Then I got the idea of comparing the results of each.

    input:   92 91 89 86 91 90 88 86 89 89 89 88 89 87 88 93

    • libvpx 0.9.0 “short” :
      forward : -314 5 1 5 4 5 -2 0 0 1 -1 -1 1 11 -3 -4
      inverse : 92 91 89 86 89 86 91 90 91 90 88 86 88 86 89 89
      
    • libvpx 0.9.0 “fast” :
      forward : -314 4 0 5 4 4 -2 0 0 1 0 -1 1 11 -2 -5
      inverse : 91 91 89 86 88 86 91 90 91 90 88 86 88 86 89 89
      
    • libvpx 0.9.5 “short” :
      forward : -312 7 1 0 1 12 -5 2 2 -3 3 -1 1 0 -2 1
      inverse : 92 91 89 86 91 90 88 86 89 89 89 88 89 87 88 93
      

    I was surprised when I noticed that input[] != idct(fdct(input[])) in some of the above cases. Then I remembered that the aforementioned property isn’t what is meant by a “bit-exact” transform– only that all implementations of the inverse transform are supposed to produce bit-exact output for a given vector of input coefficients.

    Anyway, I tried applying each of these forward transforms. I got slightly differing results, with the latest one I tried (the fdct from libvpx 0.9.5) producing the best results (to my eye). At least the trees look better in the Big Buck Bunny logo image :



    The dense trees of the Big Buck Bunny logo using one of the libvpx 0.9.0 forward transforms


    The same segment of the image using the libvpx 0.9.5 forward transform

    Then again, it could be that the different numbers generated by the newer forward transform triggered different prediction modes to be chosen. Overall, adapting the newer FDCT did not dramatically improve the encoding quality.

    Working on the intra 4×4 mode encoding is generating some rather more accurate blocks than my intra 16×16 encoder. Pengvado indicated that x264 generates perfectly legible results when forcing the encoder to only use intra 16×16 mode. To be honest, I’m having trouble understanding how that can possibly occur thanks to the Walsh-Hadamard transform (WHT). I think that’s where a lot of the error is creeping in with my intra 16×16 encoder. Then again, FFmpeg implements an inverse WHT function that bears ‘vp8′ in its name. This implies that it’s custom to the algorithm and not exactly shared with H.264.

  • Add a clarification to the floor1 decode spec, since I had to re-determine some of...

    3 février 2012, par Monty
    Add a clarification to the floor1 decode spec, since I had to re-determine some of what
    it says for myself after not thinking about it for 15-ish years.
    

    Also, fix an indentation bug that occurred due to TABs sneaking in

    git-svn-id : http://svn.xiph.org/trunk/vorbis@18181 0101bb08-14d6-0310-b084-bc0e0c8e3800

    • [DH] doc/07-floor1.tex
  • Revision 532faf0f1c : Added unit test for 4x4 forward dct Change-Id : I1607676879c29adc0173a3c0355a0e5

    18 juin 2012, par Yaowu Xu

    Changed Paths : Add /test/fdct4x4_test.cc Modify /test/test.mk Added unit test for 4x4 forward dct Change-Id : I1607676879c29adc0173a3c0355a0e5d8a84fc3b