Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (10140)

• Simply beyond ridiculous

  7 mai 2010, par Dark Shikari — H.265, speed

  For the past few years, various improvements on H.264 have been periodically proposed, ranging from larger transforms to better intra prediction. These finally came together in the JCT-VC meeting this past April, where over two dozen proposals were made for a next-generation video coding standard. Of course, all of these were in very rough-draft form ; it will likely take years to filter it down into a usable standard. In the process, they’ll pick the most useful features (hopefully) from each proposal and combine them into something a bit more sane. But, of course, it all has to start somewhere.

  A number of features were common : larger block sizes, larger transform sizes, fancier interpolation filters, improved intra prediction schemes, improved motion vector prediction, increased internal bit depth, new entropy coding schemes, and so forth. A lot of these are potentially quite promising and resolve a lot of complaints I’ve had about H.264, so I decided to try out the proposal that appeared the most interesting : the Samsung+BBC proposal (A124), which claims compression improvements of around 40%.

  The proposal combines a bouillabaisse of new features, ranging from a 12-tap interpolation filter to 12thpel motion compensation and transforms as large as 64×64. Overall, I would say it’s a good proposal and I don’t doubt their results given the sheer volume of useful features they’ve dumped into it. I was a bit worried about complexity, however, as 12-tap interpolation filters don’t exactly scream “fast”.

  I prepared myself for the slowness of an unoptimized encoder implementation, compiled their tool, and started a test encode with their recommended settings.

  I waited. The first frame, an I-frame, completed.

  I took a nap.

  I waited. The second frame, a P-frame, was done.

  I played a game of Settlers.

  I waited. The third frame, a B-frame, was done.

  I worked on a term paper.

  I waited. The fourth frame, a B-frame, was done.

  After a full 6 hours, 8 frames had encoded. Yes, at this rate, it would take a full two weeks to encode 10 seconds of HD video. On a Core i7. This is not merely slow ; this is over 1000 times slower than x264 on “placebo” mode. This is so slow that it is not merely impractical ; it is impossible to even test. This encoder is apparently designed for some sort of hypothetical future computer from space. And word from other developers is that the Intel proposal is even slower.

  This has led me to suspect that there is a great deal of cheating going on in the H.265 proposals. The goal of the proposals, of course, is to pick the best feature set for the next generation video compression standard. But there is an extra motivation : organizations whose features get accepted get patents on the resulting standard, and thus income. With such large sums of money in the picture, dishonesty becomes all the more profitable.

  There is a set of rules, of course, to limit how the proposals can optimize their encoders. If different encoders use different optimization techniques, the results will no longer be comparable — remember, they are trying to compare compression features, not methods of optimizing encoder-side decisions. Thus all encoders are required to use a constant quantizer, specified frame types, and so forth. But there are no limits on how slow an encoder can be or what algorithms it can use.

  It would be one thing if the proposed encoder was a mere 10 times slower than the current reference ; that would be reasonable, given the low level of optimization and higher complexity of the new standard. But this is beyond ridiculous. With the prize given to whoever can eke out the most PSNR at a given quantizer at the lowest bitrate (with no limits on speed), we’re just going to get an arms race of slow encoders, with every company trying to use the most ridiculous optimizations possible, even if they involve encoding the frame 100,000 times over to choose the optimal parameters. And the end result will be as I encountered here : encoders so slow that they are simply impossible to even test.

  Such an arms race certainly does little good in optimizing for reality where we don’t have 30 years to encode an HD movie : a feature that gives great compression improvements is useless if it’s impossible to optimize for in a reasonable amount of time. Certainly once the standard is finalized practical encoders will be written — but it makes no sense to optimize the standard for a use-case that doesn’t exist. And even attempting to “optimize” anything is difficult when encoding a few seconds of video takes weeks.

  Update : The people involved have contacted me and insist that there was in fact no cheating going on. This is probably correct ; the problem appears to be that the rules that were set out were simply not strict enough, making many changes that I would intuitively consider “cheating” to be perfectly allowed, and thus everyone can do it.

  I would like to apologize if I implied that the results weren’t valid ; they are — the Samsung-BBC proposal is definitely one of the best, which is why I picked it to test with. It’s just that I think any situation in which it’s impossible to test your own software is unreasonable, and thus the entire situation is an inherently broken one, given the lax rules, slow baseline encoder, and no restrictions on compute time.

• Dreamcast Anniversary Programming

  10 septembre 2010, par Multimedia Mike — Game Hacking

  This day last year saw a lot of nostalgia posts on the internet regarding the Sega Dreamcast, launched 10 years prior to that day (on 9/9/99). Regrettably, none of the retrospectives that I read really seemed to mention the homebrew potential, which is the aspect that interested me. On the occasion of the DC’s 11th anniversary, I wanted to remind myself how to build something for the unit and do so using modern equipment and build tools.

  
  
  

  Background
  Like many other programmers, I initially gained interest in programming because I desired to program video games. Not content to just plunk out games on a PC, I always had a deep, abiding ambition to program actual video game hardware. That is, I wanted to program a purpose-built video game console. The Sega Dreamcast might be the most ideal candidate to ever emerge for that task. All that was required to run your own software on the unit was the console, a PC, some free software tools, and a special connectivity measure.

  The Equipment
  Here is the hardware required (ideally) to build software for the DC :

  • The console itself (I happen to have 3 of them laying around, as pictured above)
  • Some peripherals : Such as the basic DC controller, the DC keyboard (flagship title : Typing of the Dead), and the visual memory unit (VMU)
    
    
    
  • VGA box : The DC supported 480p gaming via a device that allowed you to connect the console straight to a VGA monitor via 15-pin D-sub. Not required for development, but very useful. I happen to have 3 of them from different third parties :
    
    
    
  • Finally, the connectivity measure for hooking the DC to the PC.
    There are 2 options here. The first is rare, expensive and relatively fast : A DC broadband adapter. The second is slower but much less expensive and relatively easy to come by– the DC coder’s cable. This was a DB-9 adapter on one end and a DC serial adapter on the other, and a circuit in the middle to monkey with voltage levels or some such ; I’m no electrical engineer. I procured this model from the notorious Lik Sang, well before that outfit was sued out of business.
    
    
    

  Dealing With Legacy
  Take a look at that coder’s cable again. DB-9 ? When was the last time you owned a computer with one of those ? And then think farther back to the last time to had occasion to plug something into one of those ports (likely a serial mouse).

  
  
  

  A few years ago, someone was about to toss out this Belkin USB to DB-9 serial converter when I intervened. I foresaw the day when I would dust off the coder’s cable. So now I can connect a USB serial cable to my Eee PC, which then connects via converter to a different serial cable, one which has its own conversion circuit that alters the connection to yet another type of serial cable.

  Bits is bits is bits as far as I’m concerned.

  
  
  

  Putting It All Together
  Now to assemble all the pieces (plus a monitor) into one development desktop :

  
  
  

  The monitor says “dcload 1.0.3, idle…”. That’s a custom boot CD-ROM that is patiently waiting to receive commands, code and data via the serial port.

  Getting The Software
  Back in the day, homebrew software development on the DC revolved around these components :

  • GNU binutils : for building base toolchains for the Hitachi SH-4 main CPU as well as the ARM7-based audio coprocessor
  • GNU gcc/g++ : for building compilers on top of binutils for the 2 CPUs
  • Newlib : a C library intended for embedded systems
  • KallistiOS : an open source, real-time OS developed for the DC

  The DC was my first exposure to building cross compilers. I developed some software for the DC in the earlier part of the decade. Now, I am trying to figure out how I did it, especially since I think I came up with a few interesting ideas at the time.

  Struggling With the Software Legacy
  The source for KallistiOS has gone untouched since about 2004 but is still around thanks to Sourceforge. The instructions for properly building the toolchain have been lost to time, or would be were it not for the Internet Archive’s copy of a site called Hangar Eleven. Also, KallistiOS makes reference to a program called ‘dc-tool’ which is needed on the client side for communicating with dcload. I was able to find this binary at the Boob ! site (well-known in DC circles).

  I was able to build the toolchain using binutils 2.20.1, gcc 4.5.1 and newlib 1.18.0. Building the toolchain is an odd process as it requires building the binutils, then building the C compiler, then newlib, and then building the C compiler again along with the C++ compiler because the C++ compiler depends on newlib.

  With some effort, I got the toolchain to build KallistiOS and most of its example programs. I documented most of the tweaks I had to make, several of them exactly the same as this one that I recently discovered while resurrecting a 10-year-old C program (common construct in C programming of old ?).

  Moment of Truth
  So I had some example programs built as ELF files. I told dc-tool to upload and run them on the waiting console. Unfortunately, the tool would just sort of stall, though some communication had evidently taken place. It has been many years since I have seen this in action but I recall that something more ought to be happening.

  Plan B (Hardware)
  This is the point that I remember that I have been holding onto one rather old little machine that still has a DB-9 serial port. It’s not especially ergonomic to set up. I have to run it on my floor because, to connect it to my network, I need to run a 25′ ethernet cable that just barely reaches from the other room. The machine doesn’t seem to like USB keyboards, which is a shame since I have long since ditched any PS/2 keyboards. Fortunately, the box still has an old Gentoo distro and is running sshd, a holdover from its former life as a headless box.

  
  
  

  Now when I run dc-tool, both the PC and DC report the upload progress while pretty overscan bars oscillate on the DC’s monitor. Now I’m back in business, until…

  Plan C (Software)
  None of these KallistiOS example programs are working. Some are even reporting catastrophic failures (register dumps) via the serial console. That’s when I remember that gcc can be a bit fickle on CPU architectures that are not, shall we say, first-class citizens. Back in the day, gcc 2.95 was a certified no-go for SH-4 development. 3.0.3 or 3.0.4 was called upon at the time. As I’m hosting this toolchain on x86_64 right now, gcc 3.0.4 can’t even be built (predates the architecture).

  One last option : As I searched through my old DC project directories, I found that I still have a lot of the resulting binaries, the ones I built 7-8 years ago. I upload a few of those and I finally see homebrew programming at work again, including this old program (described in detail here).

  Next Steps
  If I ever feel like revisiting this again, I suppose I can try some of the older 4.x series to see if they build valid programs. Alternatively, try building an x86_32-hosted 3.0.4 toolchain which ought to be a known good. And if that fails, search a little bit more to find that there are still active Dreamcast communities out there on the internet which probably have development toolchain binaries ready for download.

• Brute Force Dimensional Analysis

  15 juillet 2010, par Multimedia Mike — Game Hacking, Python

  I was poking at the data files of a really bad (is there any other kind ?) interactive movie video game known simply by one letter : D. The Sega Saturn version of the game is comprised primarily of Sega FILM/CPK files, about which I wrote the book. The second most prolific file type bears the extension ’.dg2’. Cursory examination of sample files revealed an apparently headerless format. Many of the video files are 288x144 in resolution. Multiplying that width by that height and then doubling it (as in, 2 bytes/pixel) yields 82944, which happens to be the size of a number of these DG2 files. Now, if only I had a tool that could take a suspected raw RGB file and convert it to a more standard image format.

  Here’s the FFmpeg conversion recipe I used :

   ffmpeg -f rawvideo -pix_fmt rgb555 -s 288x144 -i raw_file -y output.png
  

  So that covers the files that are suspected to be 288x144 in dimension. But what about other file sizes ? My brute force approach was to try all possible dimensions that would yield a particular file size. The Python code for performing this operation is listed at the end of this post.

  It’s interesting to view the progression as the script compresses to different sizes :

  
  
  

  That ’D’ is supposed to be red. So right away, we see that rgb555(le) is not the correct input format. Annoyingly, FFmpeg cannot handle rgb555be as a raw input format. But this little project worked well enough as a proof of concept.

  If you want to toy around with these files (and I know you do), I have uploaded a selection at : http://multimedia.cx/dg2/.

  Here is my quick Python script for converting one of these files to every acceptable resolution.

  work-out-resolution.py :
  

  PLAIN TEXT

  PYTHON :

  1. # !/usr/bin/python
  2.  
  3. import commands
  4. import math
  5. import os
  6. import sys
  7.  
  8. FFMPEG = "/path/to/ffmpeg"
  9.  
  10. def convert_file(width, height, filename) :
  11.  outfile = "%s-%dx%d.png" % (filename, width, height)
  12.  command = "%s -f rawvideo -pix_fmt rgb555 -s %dx%d -i %s -y %s" % (FFMPEG, width, height, filename, outfile)
  13.  commands.getstatusoutput(command)
  14.  
  15. if len(sys.argv) <2 :
  16.  print "USAGE : work-out-resolution.py <file>"
  17.  sys.exit(1)
  18.  
  19. filename = sys.argv[1]
  20. if not os.path.exists(filename) :
  21.  print filename + " does not exist"
  22.  sys.exit(1)
  23.  
  24. filesize = os.path.getsize(filename) / 2
  25.  
  26. limit = int(math.sqrt(filesize)) + 1
  27. for i in xrange(1, limit) :
  28.  if filesize % i == 0 and filesize & 1 == 0 :
  29.   convert_file(i, filesize / i, filename)
  30.   convert_file(filesize / i, i, filename)