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

Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 151 posts

Re: Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

#141

Post by majewsky »

sondr3 wrote: post #119
ThomPete wrote: post #75

Good thing Denmark is a small market as it means Dick in Danish.

I'm just gonna start naming my projects by rolling my face on my keyboard, that way I won't have to be afraid of naming it something offensive in another language. /s

A naming pattern that I used for some time was to open the Wikipedia article of the thing that my program is about, and look in the sidebar for nice-sounding names for it in another language. It often ended up being something Scandinavian. For example, KDE's jigsaw puzzle game is called Palapeli (Finnish for "jigsaw puzzle") for this reason.

Re: Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

#142

Post by janwas »

cjensen wrote: post #103
mattnewton wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe "The software currently requires an AVX2 and FMA capable CPU, e.g. Haswell." holds the secret? Some kind of experimental test bed for using CPU vector instructions to speed up compression/decompression? Disclaimer: I have no idea what I am talking about. For all I know possible use of these instructions is already a feature of HEIF and that statement is irrelevant.

Yep. Use of AVX2 and so forth a pretty standard thing to do to get decent performance for video/image encoding and decoding. Worth noting: Skylake with Integrate Graphics includes an x265 encoder and decoder. If that can't be adapted to HEIF, that's a huge win for the format.

If you're interested in this kind of thing, dc_predictor.cc might be fun to look at. It computes the predictors in parallel (rather than the usual 'do the same thing to 32 pixels') because here pixels depend on causal neighbor pixels.

Re: Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

#143

Post by janwas »

amelius wrote: post #62
a_t48 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The file does contain an encoding-id - it's the last three or so characters in the filename (alternatively, the first four bytes in the file data).

Yes, but the amount of encodings is pretty limited. It's better (imho) to make the encodings free of any viewer or browser. That way, we can more easily handle a large variety of encodings, and different versions of encodings. Anyone could make a new encoder, and create files using them. You can see it as a "democratization" of encodings.

The FourCC at the beginning is indeed your encoding-id. This is common in file formats (e.g. RIFF). Out of curiosity, how is the 32-bit space insufficient?

Re: Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

#144

Post by jaclaz »

sondr3 wrote: post #119
ThomPete wrote: post #75

Good thing Denmark is a small market as it means Dick in Danish.

I'm just gonna start naming my projects by rolling my face on my keyboard, that way I won't have to be afraid of naming it something offensive in another language. /s

... freak wormholes in space-time continuum permitting, of course...

http://www.mostly-harmless.de/crllstlk.htm

Re: Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

#145

Post by Djvacto »

DannyBee wrote: post #79
trymas wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you work at Google __everything you make__, even in your spare time, belongs to them. Okay, google makes software and if you make software on your spare time maybe it's reasonable that company does not want to leak IP and thus produces these contracts. But what about these stupid examples: - Building a backyard deck for your house - Taking pictures as a hobby - Doing woodworking (e.g. making a chair and a table…

Errr. Decks are not intellectual property, for starters. "Even if those examples are completely rubbish and won't stand in court for Google, it's still absurd idea. You get payed salary for your time and work - that's it! That's where Google's power ends. After hours you go home and it's bullshit that they can own your personal work done on your own freetime at your private property with private tools and your own id…

I really don't think this is the case.

Check out the top comment from @grellas here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2208056

At the end, he mentions that general statements never apply to everybody, and unique situations vary. Additionally, in California the law protects moreso than other states.

Re: Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

#146

Post by oliwarner »

pasta wrote: post #71
vladdanilov wrote: post #48

> New lossy image format gives 55 % less bytes than jpeg with the same butteraugli score. It's the most serious attempt to date to make an open source replacement for JPEG which misses a lot of advances in data/image compression. I hope it stops the spreading of HEIF plagued by patents.

I had high hopes for FLIF. What I think is great is that the client can control how much data is downloaded. This is great for responsive use. Unfortunately the license is holding back implementations.

> Unlike some other image formats (e.g. BPG and JPEG 2000), FLIF is completely royalty-free and it is not known to be encumbered by software patents.

The reference implementations are also open source (dual licensed between LGPL and Apache 2)... But even if you don't like those, you can write your own under whatever license you like. They're just implementations of a spec.

Re: Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

#147

Post by Ajedi32 »

ac29 wrote: post #116
Ajedi32 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure APNG is supported now in all browsers except Edge and IE. So not quite there yet, but we're getting close.

Doesn't work in Chrome for Android either: https://caniuse.com/#search=apng .

Are you sure that's accurate? Chrome Platform Status says it's enabled by default in Chrome 59 on Android: https://www.chromestatus.com/feature/6691520493125632

Re: Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

#148

Post by mercer »

cptskippy wrote: post #127
martin_bech wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It litteraly means dick.. i mean.. no words.

Oddly the name Dick is spelled and pronounced just like the slang term for a man's penis in the English language. You would think that would offend American puritanical sensibilities but the name is quite common.

In Holland there's a famous 90s detective show with a main character surnamed 'De Cock'. One of his 'catchphrases' is that upon being introduced to someone, he explicitly spells out C-O-C-K to them (because in Dutch the typical spelling is K-O-K), which means 'cook'.

Despite the fact that Dutch people are often fluent in English, and despite the fact that we even had a prime-minister with the name 'Kok', there's a surprisingly low number of jokes, in my opinion, involving this particular surname. I guess somehow the context switch from Dutch to English is big enough that it's just not all that funny.

Re: Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

#149

Post by mercer »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #94
extra88 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has failed to convince any browser maker not using their entire Blink rendering engine (i.e. Opera) to implement support for WebP. It's been almost seven years, not what I'd call successful. On the server side, if you're processing images to create multiple versions anyway (thumbnails, different sizes for mobile & desktop, etc.), throwing WebP versions in there is simple enough and should reduce bandwidth use.…

Firefox support is coming. Looks like there's been a bit of activity on the ticket: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1294490

I am not well-schooled in this area, but I find it very surprising that webP is not supported on Firefox yet. Am I wrong in being surprised?

Re: Pik – a new lossy image format for the internet

#150

Post by mercer »

mljoe wrote: post #130
jacobolus wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who “absolutely can’t use” it, and for what purpose? Most people use patent-encumbered media formats all the time. HEVC is going to have dedicated hardware support on most devices in the near future, and will therefore be power-efficient and fast to encode and decode.

There has never been anything quite like the patent situation around HEVC. Using HEVC legally requires signing four different license agreements at the minumum[1]. The license agreements with Technicolor and Velos Media are actually secret. This includes their fees. The other two licenses (MPEG LA and HEVC Advance) are public. They are far more expensive then H.264 taken individually, even at current promotional rate…

I feel there should be some long-form article about this floating around, and if there isn't one, there should be!
Post reply on HN