Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BPG Image format

bellard.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 339 posts

Re: BPG Image format

#51

Post by gambiter »

minikites wrote: post #39
gambiter wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are too sensitive. I'm a hetero male, and I don't find the image 'fun' at all... it's just an image. It doesn't send a message to anyone. If anything, I don't really care for it for image algorithm tests because the palette is fairly flat. No matter how you feel about the image itself, though, there is value in continuing to use it... people are familiar with it, to the point of it becoming almost cliché. This…

> I'm a hetero male ... it's just an image. That's the exact privilege you get to enjoy as a hetero male. You get to ignore things like this when your female colleagues (if you're lucky enough to work with any) have to look at the image and be reminded that many people continue to view them as objects.

Not sure if you're trolling, but I have a spare minute...

- If I post a picture of a cute kitten, does it mean I look at a cat as an object? That I will only under-appreciate all animals because I liked a photo of one? - If I post a picture of my mother or father, am I objectifying them? - What if I take a picture of a street performer who's doing some awesome thing and post it... am I reducing them to simply an object of attraction?

I just said it didn't affect me one way or another... that it is just an image. If someone thinks this image means I view a woman as an object, they are projecting THEIR OWN ISSUES onto me. That is the ONLY way that it could be offensive, in that they are choosing to be offended by something that 99% of the population think nothing about.

Re: BPG Image format

#52

Post by TD-Linux »

reidrac wrote: post #10
userbinator wrote: post #7

Its purpose is to replace the JPEG image format when quality or file size is an issue. Some of the HEVC algorithms may be protected by patents in some countries There have been some patent disputes over JPEG, but I don't think replacing it with another possibly patented format is a good idea, even if it's technically superior in some ways.

"Most devices already include or will include hardware HEVC support, so we suggest to use it if patents are an issue." I don't know if that suggestion makes much sense, but you missed it in your quote.

I can't imagine ever wanting to spin up a hardware HEVC decoder context every time I want to render an image. That would enormously slow down display of a web page with this format.

Edit: decoder, not encoder

Re: BPG Image format

#53

Post by DanBC »

loudmax wrote: post #19

I appreciate the historical tradition of using the photo of beautiful young Lena Söderberg as a test image, but it's time to move on. It's fun for us hetero males, but like it or not, this sends a message to young women that they aren't welcome in this field. I wish Fabrice Bellard would have left them out of the demo set. Having said that, all those demo photos do look good. I was wondering how we were going to see…

Why don't you find a set of great test images (under suitable licence) then run those through the wide variety of image formats at different settings, and host it all on a website? (Put a few ads on it and you have nearly passive income, if the hosting isn't too much)

Re: BPG Image format

#54

Post by TD-Linux »

aidenn0 wrote: post #23
1ris wrote: post #16

Why not use Daala to start from? The overlapping transform probably help especially for still images, and the patent situation is probably at least better.

I'm not sure that Daala has finalized it's I-frame format yet.

There's no reason to wait until the I-frame format is finalized - a still image format would probably be a separate codec anyway, so compatibility isn't important.

Re: BPG Image format

#55

Post by ChrisGranger »

bane wrote: post #42
anigbrowl wrote: post #14

EDIT: I didn't expect this comment to be so popular and feel like I've hijacked the thread a little - sorry. Feel free to continue at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8706850 I would much rather someone revived the Fractal Image format, which is now out of patent. It's very expensive to encode, but that's nowhere near as big a problem as it used to be. It's very fast to decode, very small, and the files are resol…

http://www.verrando.com/pulcini/gp-uw1.html They have a 6-minute figure on their page. I wonder what modern hardware could do with it? Anybody care to give it a whirl?

I wonder how much that figure would drop if one could optimize the process for modern CPUs...

Re: BPG Image format

#56

Post by geofft »

DanBC wrote: post #53
loudmax wrote: post #19

I appreciate the historical tradition of using the photo of beautiful young Lena Söderberg as a test image, but it's time to move on. It's fun for us hetero males, but like it or not, this sends a message to young women that they aren't welcome in this field. I wish Fabrice Bellard would have left them out of the demo set. Having said that, all those demo photos do look good. I was wondering how we were going to see…

Why don't you find a set of great test images (under suitable licence) then run those through the wide variety of image formats at different settings, and host it all on a website? (Put a few ads on it and you have nearly passive income, if the hosting isn't too much)

Did you read the article? There were _several_ great test images used in the Mozilla study under suitable licenses, and Bellard did test with some of those. The Lena picture here wasn't particularly scientifically useful, it was presumably just used out of a sense of tradition. (Mozilla didn't use it.)

http://people.mozilla.org/~josh/lossy_compressed_image_study...

Re: BPG Image format

#57

Post by cjensen »

aidenn0 wrote: post #24

How many "better JPEGs" have been created now, without significantly displacing JPEG's market share?

JPEG-2000, for example, is very hard to decode in a CPU. Many implementations take a second to decode an image.

There are two really hopeful things about this new project: (1) by leveraging HEVC, we get cheap (energy efficient) and fast decode on future mobile devices and (2) Since he is demonstrating pretty quick decode in JavaScript now, it clearly isn't a CPU pig like JPEG-2000.

Re: BPG Image format

#58

Post by lbotos »

anigbrowl wrote: post #14

EDIT: I didn't expect this comment to be so popular and feel like I've hijacked the thread a little - sorry. Feel free to continue at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8706850 I would much rather someone revived the Fractal Image format, which is now out of patent. It's very expensive to encode, but that's nowhere near as big a problem as it used to be. It's very fast to decode, very small, and the files are resol…

excuse my ignorance, but encoding would happen "once" when it was created by the author, right?

Re: BPG Image format

#59

Post by ChrisGranger »

gpvos wrote: post #43
ChrisGranger wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WebP is in some ways superior, in particular because it has a lossless option like PNG. [Edit: NOPE, I was mistaken. ] I think it's kind of a shame that it hasn't caught on all that well. Maybe it's a fantasy, but I'd sure like to consolidate all web images into a single widely-supported and open source format. Ah, to dream...

Sixth bullet: Lossless compression is supported.

Missed it, my bad!

Re: BPG Image format

#60

Post by dluan »

ChrisGranger wrote: post #31
aidenn0 wrote: post #24

How many "better JPEGs" have been created now, without significantly displacing JPEG's market share?

Indeed. Without out-of-the-box support in the major image editors like Photoshop and all the popular web browsers, I don't think we'll see JPEG overtaken any time soon.

Honestly, just last night I was looking and editing photos of a recent trip, and I uploaded them to tumblr to share on a small photo blog I just recently started. After spending some time trying to get the colors right, I realized that tumblr's image compression is god awfully horrendous. I felt so bad looking at my source JPEGs next to the tumblr post that I created a new flickr account right then.

I don't necessarily think JPEG is bad, or that it's even Tumblr's fault that I first thought to share photos there, but if any service/software started using BPG I think I would excitedly try it out.

[e.g. http://www.huddug.com/ vs https://www.flickr.com/photos/127341162@N03/15762469070/]

Post reply on HN