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

161–170 of 339 posts

Re: BPG Image format

#161

Post by sillysaurus3 »

pslam wrote: post #148

The big story here is this introduces a new image file format without requiring you to upgrade a browser or download a plugin . Those aren't PNGs of representative images you're looking at - that's BPG decoding happening in your browser. So we don't like HVEC due to patent worries? Fine, we can swap in another format and use the same technique. We don't have an I-frame format for Daala that's finalized yet? Fine, we…

Problem is that you can't link to BPG images yet. Specifically, right click -> copy link location.

If only the rightclick menu could be customized by JS. Adding only a limited number of entries to the menu seems like it'd be okay.

Re: BPG Image format

#162

Post by CamperBob2 »

frontsideair wrote: post #121
CamperBob2 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering that Lenna herself is fine with it, I'd say so. (Unless you want to deny a woman the right to permit the use of her own body for aesthetic, erotic, or academic purposes, which is the logical if ironic outcome of some schools of feminism.) The problem with the Lenna imagery isn't political correctness, it's the fact that it's a crappy scan from a magazine that always had crappy photography to begin with.

> Unless you want to deny a woman the right to permit Not doing something you are permitted to do is somehow denying their right to permit? It's nice of her permitting the use, however her permission doesn't force us to use it. By the same logic, it would be perfectly okay use goatse image if the guy permitted it, right?

By the same logic, it would be perfectly okay use goatse image if the guy permitted it, right?

If the ability to represent the goatse image were a critical part of the evaluation process for a compression algorithm, then yes. However, we evolved to recognize and respond to subtle features in human faces, not human colons. So, no, goatse would not be an appropriate reference image.

Re: BPG Image format

#163

Post by j2kun »

ANTSANTS wrote: post #137
j2kun wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now show me a picture of a man from that dataset that could possibly be construed as sexual. This is not a matter of prudishness. I would be totally fine (see my other comment in this thread) if researchers used both male and female crops, but they don't. So to make your point you need to show me all of the male French researchers who are accepting of male nudity in their image processing research. I would be very su…

>Now show me a picture of a man from that dataset that could possibly be construed as sexual. >This is not a matter of prudishness. There seems to be a contradiction here. >I would be very surprised if you could find me a single one. I agree, not because I think male French researchers would give a rat's ass about the cropped head of a naked guy appearing as a test subject, but because I doubt any would be foolish en…

You're missing the point, which is that it's not the specific image, but that testbeds use suggestive photos of attractive women and not men. You want people to feel free to use nudity or suggestiveness. Fine. I want them to be equal about which suggestive photos they use. As in not all women.

And now you're saying that French researchers don't care, but they do because they don't want to anger Americans? (And somehow they're all white, live on the west coast, and have iPhones?) What a crazy web you're weaving.

Re: BPG Image format

#164

Post by CamperBob2 »

j2kun wrote: post #159
CamperBob2 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that women in science cannot read a paper on image processing without being reminded that it's a boy's club. I find this attitude far more patronizing than any conceivable choice of test imagery in a graphics research project. Suggest reading this before posting anything else about the delicate sensibilities of "women in science": http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/magazine/my-great-great-au... Do you t…

I'm sure they do, because I can point to them speaking up about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna#Controversy I'm not saying all women are crippled by it, because they have to deal with such nonsense while walking down the street every day. But can't we as scientists strive to improve the status quo?

(Shrug) I can point to outraged people "speaking up" about everything from global warming to Jar-Jar Binks. It doesn't prove much, except that some people enjoy a good bout of outrage.

The scientists in the article I linked, on the other hand, aren't speaking up about anything, because they're all dead.

Re: BPG Image format

#165

Post by rinon »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #161
pslam wrote: post #148

The big story here is this introduces a new image file format without requiring you to upgrade a browser or download a plugin . Those aren't PNGs of representative images you're looking at - that's BPG decoding happening in your browser. So we don't like HVEC due to patent worries? Fine, we can swap in another format and use the same technique. We don't have an I-frame format for Daala that's finalized yet? Fine, we…

Problem is that you can't link to BPG images yet. Specifically, right click -> copy link location. If only the rightclick menu could be customized by JS. Adding only a limited number of entries to the menu seems like it'd be okay.

With additional effort you can by including the proper JS. However, many sites would find this a benefit rather than a problem, since hotlinking takes away page-views.

Re: BPG Image format

#166

Post by andreasvc »

yason wrote: post #80
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…

Not everything is about gender, sexism, feminism, or chauvinism. There are very few things in the world that are not somehow associated with male vs. female in an objectively equal way. The Lena in question is just an image with a long tradition. Anyone can find and use a male image for his/her own image compression tests if s/he wants to. It's not a statement to use Lena instead.

I understood the complaint to be not about male vs. female, but about the fact that the original is a pornographic picture from Playboy magazine.

Re: BPG Image format

#167

Post by wtbob »

> Supported by most Web browsers with a small Javascript decoder

Well, so much for that. Executing code in order to view an image is just begging to be exploited…

Re: BPG Image format

#168

Post by kinghajj »

TD-Linux wrote: post #84
vmarsy wrote: post #74

Impressive! Right now it requires a .js decoder, of 75kb. Assuming a fast C++ decoder instead,(possibly GPU accelerated if the decoding algorithm is well suited for it) and not using JS but what would be the rendering times? PNG are 4x bigger in his experiments, but interlaced PNG makes it more pleasant to users since it can be rendered progressively, can BPG benefit from such a thing? edit: Interlacing is also used…

Progressive rendering of HEVC is not possible in the same way as it is done for JPEG or PNG. It is also not very suited to GPU rendering. A C++ decoder with assembly optimizations could easily run four times as fast as the Javascript version. Unfortunately distributing it would not be possible due to patents.

Why would a C++ version have to worry about patents but the JS one does not?

Re: BPG Image format

#169

Post by ANTSANTS »

j2kun wrote: post #163
ANTSANTS wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Now show me a picture of a man from that dataset that could possibly be construed as sexual. >This is not a matter of prudishness. There seems to be a contradiction here. >I would be very surprised if you could find me a single one. I agree, not because I think male French researchers would give a rat's ass about the cropped head of a naked guy appearing as a test subject, but because I doubt any would be foolish en…

You're missing the point, which is that it's not the specific image, but that testbeds use suggestive photos of attractive women and not men. You want people to feel free to use nudity or suggestiveness. Fine. I want them to be equal about which suggestive photos they use. As in not all women. And now you're saying that French researchers don't care, but they do because they don't want to anger Americans? (And someho…

>This is not a matter of prudishness. I would be totally fine (see my other comment in this thread)

You mean this one? "Sexualizing women has nothing to do with image processing research." How positively libertine of you.

>You're missing the point

And you're missing my point, which is that if you really weren't a prude, you wouldn't care either way. Straight men like pretty women, straight women like handsome men, gay men like handsome men, gay women like pretty women, some people like some combination of the above, some guys 40 years ago liked a pretty woman, who gives a fuck? Stop being offended by extremely tame displays of sexuality.

>And now you're saying that French researchers don't care, but they do because they don't want to anger Americans?

You city slickers don't seem very good with jokes, do you?

I'd tell you to "lighten up" but I forgot that's code for "long live the patriarchy."

Re: BPG Image format

#170

Post by spot »

anigbrowl wrote: post #90
jerf wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see a modern implementation and some unbiased testing done before I got too excited. From what I could tell, the tech got more hype than was justified by its ability to perform, and I suspect the fact that it still isn't in much use may have more to do with difficult being better at anything in particular than a current existing solution rather than a lack of people interested in it. (And note my phrasing…

IT's not the most competitive in compression or speed terms as far as I know, but the resolution independence is a Big Deal to me. I first saw this technology about 20 years ago and I am still impressed by it because nothing else has delivered that for photographic images. It's like SVG for photography. At the time, encoding required a) an expensive license and (IIRC) b) an accelerator board if you intended to do any…

this is 100% BS, it's an illusion.

you should read the Talk page of the wikipedia entry, where it's obvious there are some misinformed/deceptive folks took control of the page. See the comp.compression FAQ is a much better resource, as is the paper Brendt Wohlberg and Gerhard de Jager, "A review of the fractal image coding literature", IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 1716--1729, Dec 1999 in particular " purely fractal-based schemes are not competitive with the current state of the art"

Post reply on HN