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 556925
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[15]: Big picture...
by saynte on Thu 28th Mar 2013 12:13 UTC in reply to "RE[14]: Big picture..."
saynte
Member since:
2007-12-10

This whole thing started because you stated:


VP8 is not inferior in performance to h.264 except for just one factor: encoding speed. In every other respect VP8 can match or exceed h.264 performance.


Then I showed some relevant data where x264 outperformed VP8.

I'll state why I feel x264 has a higher maximum quality/bit than VP8 (Google's encoder)

- the comparison of x264-baseline and VP8 for WebRTC uses the baseline profile, which was written about 10 years ago. They also didn't ask x264 to optimize for PSNR (what they measured), slanting the results away from x264. The test was done by a Googler (apparently) and the methodology ripped apart on the x264 mailing list http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/x264-devel/2013-March/009913....

- the study done at MSU which puts x264 above VP8 on SSIM at least on the high profile setting (I think it does well/better on the others as well, would have to check).

- the study from TUB which also puts x264 above VP8 on VQM, although it is from the initial public release of VP8 (which still had some years of development within On2).

- using recent versions of both encoders, this screenshot comparison https://gist.github.com/Hupotronic/4645784, single screenshots such for comparison, but c'est la vie.

- another comparison on various video clips measure PSNR and SSIM http://blog.existentialize.com/tag/vp8.html

- the opinion of an expert on the topic, the author behind x264 and also a vp8 encoder

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[16]: Big picture...
by lemur2 on Thu 28th Mar 2013 14:05 in reply to "RE[15]: Big picture..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

VP8 is not inferior in performance to h.264 except for just one factor: encoding speed. In every other respect VP8 can match or exceed h.264 performance.


The above statement is true.

If you encode two video to a certain filesize & resolution with "standard" or "nominal" options, then a h.264 video will in about one third of cases be better quality than VP8 (Eclair), in a third of cases it will be the other way around (VP8 quality will exceed h.264), and in about a third of cases the video quality will be essentially the same quality. H.264 does better at the higher-bitrate end of the quality spectrum.

However, you can make up the quality difference in that one third of cases where h.264 is better by opting for a higher profile when encoding VP8.

Normally the VP8 video will take longer to encode, and in the cases where you have to use a higher-than-standard profile it will take even longer to encode the VP8 video.

Nevertheless, it is possible to do it. One can match the quality. Note the operative word can.

None of this says that VP8 is the better codec, it merely says that with some extra effort it is possible to match h.264 in those cases where h.264 ordinarily produces a better outcome.

What is wrong with any of that? Don't you speak ordinary English?

Edited 2013-03-28 14:18 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[17]: Big picture...
by saynte on Thu 28th Mar 2013 17:03 in reply to "RE[16]: Big picture..."
saynte Member since:
2007-12-10

I'm not sure where you're getting your 1/3 number, can you provide data for that?


However, you can make up the quality difference in that one third of cases where h.264 is better by opting for a higher profile when encoding VP8.


Ok, you pick the highest profile from each of VP8 and x264 and you find x264 gives you better quality: how do you now make up for the quality difference?

Edited 2013-03-28 17:12 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3