Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Mar 2013 21:09 UTC
Legal Late last week, Nokia dropped what many consider to be a bomb on the WebM project: a list of patents that VP8 supposedly infringes in the form of an IETF IPR declaration. The list has made the rounds around the web, often reported as proof that VP8 infringes upon Nokia's patents. All this stuff rang a bell. Haven't we been here before? Yup, we have, with another open source codec called Opus. Qualcomm and Huawei made the same claims as Nokia did, but they turned out to be complete bogus. As it turns out, this is standard practice in the dirty business of the patent licensing industry.
Thread beginning with comment 556808
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Big picture...
by saynte on Wed 27th Mar 2013 09:29 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Big picture..."
Member since:

Great! Thanks for this!

It looks like VP8 can indeed outperform x264 on the baseline profile, which itself is a nice result, and perhaps necessary for their intended usage (realtime video conferencing).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Big picture...
by Radio on Wed 27th Mar 2013 10:29 in reply to "RE[9]: Big picture..."
Radio Member since:

Well, note that this is a PSNR test. Nice theorical test, objective and quantifiable; but as any audio and video specialist will tell you, there are many other ways to trick human vision to achieve better apparent quality, even with a worse PSNR: psychovisual optimizations. Hard to test, as you need a good hundred test subjects to rate samples in blind tests and to run an ANOVA of their subjective opinions.

Browse and Xiph's Monty's blog for a good description of the trickiness of defining what is "good" compression.

Edit: here's what such a test looks like for an audio codec:

Edited 2013-03-27 10:34 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[11]: Big picture...
by saynte on Wed 27th Mar 2013 12:27 in reply to "RE[10]: Big picture..."
saynte Member since:

Yeah, I noticed it was PSNR as well, which I had heard (although I am not directly knowledgeable about it) that if one optimizes strictly for it, it can prefer some "blurriness" in the output image. I thought SSIM had been proposed to compensate for that deficiency(?).

In any case, I think we generally conclude that we have at least two options (x264 and the VP8 encoders) which have both acceptable output.

Play time over, back to work for me ;) .

Reply Parent Score: 2