211–220 of 435 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
uh China is doing pretty awesome so thats one big massive outlier distorting the entire supposition
isn’t China still mostly piggybacking on foreign innovation?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much does Cisco pay (to MPEG?) for that?
If I understand correctly, around 10 million USD per year (according to https://www.mpegla.com/wp-content/uploads/avcweb.pdf that's the cap, and from what I've heard Cisco is selling enough actual products to hit that cap, so providing their software for free to everyone else doesn't cost them any extra in licensing fees, just hosting and such)
Naively hoped I'd read 'this will be released to the community under a GPL license' or similar. Instead found the words 'patent' and 'transparent licensing model'. I appreciate that it costs money and time to develop these algorithms, but when you're backed by multi-billion dollar "partners from industry including Apple, Ericsson, Intel, Huawei, Microsoft, Qualcomm, and Sony" perhaps they could swallow the costs? It…
Disclaimer: I work at a Fraunhofer institute, though not Fraunhofer HHI, which developed this codec, and I have no intimate knowledge on the financing of that institute or this project in particular. But some basic principles apply to all institutes the same. Fraunhofer gets roughly 30% of its funding from public sources, the remainder is raised on a per-project basis. It's a fair assumption that those industry partn…
Why would the taxpayer fund anything that isn’t open and free. Crazy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
H264 seems to still be the preferred codec in this space, even though H265 is a smaller file size. Largely due to the CPU over head of H265, though I am not sure why more people do not use GPU encoding over CPU Encoding, I have never been able to notice the difference visually
Nvidia's NVENC doesn't support CRF, one of the more popular methods of rate control during encoding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But for most situation you encode once and play multiple times. Wouldn't it be better to reduce storage and bandwidth costs with a smaller file (assuming the same quality)?
It's a trade off. When I have a batch of 40 videos and encoding h264 takes 20 minutes per video and h265 takes 4 hours means the difference between 13 days and 160 days. The latter isn't practical, I'll eat the couple hundred MB in order to save a lot of time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The dirty secret of video codecs is that you can't make a modern video codec that isn't patent encumbered The existence of Theora, VP8, VP9, and now AV1 seems to contradict that theory. You could argue that they infringe on some unknown patents, but that is also arguably true of patent cabals like MPEG (you just hope that the cabal is big enough that there aren't any patentholders lurking outside). The only differe…
Yeah. It's a mess. The video patents aren't just "patent troll" patents, either. They are highly enforceable, and were registered by corporations like Ampex. I have been trying to write a simple app to stream RTSP (security cameras), and that has been a pain. I need to basically use either proprietary (paid) or GPL software to do it. Video software is not for the faint of heart. Much as I grouse about the licensing,…
> It's GPL, because I need to use the GPL ffmpeg H.264 codec.
I don't understand the problem?
I can see the problem with people patenting things and preventing you from writing your own implementation, but it seems you just want other people to do the hard work of implementing it so you can wrap a skin around it and do what?
Naively hoped I'd read 'this will be released to the community under a GPL license' or similar. Instead found the words 'patent' and 'transparent licensing model'. I appreciate that it costs money and time to develop these algorithms, but when you're backed by multi-billion dollar "partners from industry including Apple, Ericsson, Intel, Huawei, Microsoft, Qualcomm, and Sony" perhaps they could swallow the costs? It…
A GPL implementation doesn't guarantee a patent grant. Even if you wrote the code yourself, even just for your personal use, your own work could still be illegal to use due to lacking a patent license from the original patent holders.
Be careful about using implementations of H.26x codecs, because in countries that recognize software patents the code may be illegal to use, regardless whether you've got a license for the code or not. Even when a FLOSS license says something about patent grants, it's still meaningless if the code author didn't own the patents to grant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> will be released to the community under a GPL license' or similar Both h264 and h265 have these implementations, I think FFMPEG library has both under the terms of GPLv2. The decoders are almost completely useless. The video codec, at least the decoder, needs to be in the hardware, not in software. Mobile devices just don’t have the resources to run the decoders on CPU. The code works on PC but consumes too much el…
> The decoders are almost completely useless. You'd be surprised at how often these are used.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The decoders are almost completely useless. You'd be surprised at how often these are used.
I wonder why? Even Raspberry Pi has a hardware decoder: https://github.com/Const-me/Vrmac/tree/master/VrmacVideo Linux Kernel support for HEVC is WIP but I’m pretty sure they’ll integrate eventually.
is this because of licensing/copyright?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. It's a mess. The video patents aren't just "patent troll" patents, either. They are highly enforceable, and were registered by corporations like Ampex. I have been trying to write a simple app to stream RTSP (security cameras), and that has been a pain. I need to basically use either proprietary (paid) or GPL software to do it. Video software is not for the faint of heart. Much as I grouse about the licensing,…
> I need to basically use either proprietary (paid) or GPL software to do it. > It's GPL, because I need to use the GPL ffmpeg H.264 codec. I don't understand the problem? I can see the problem with people patenting things and preventing you from writing your own implementation, but it seems you just want other people to do the hard work of implementing it so you can wrap a skin around it and do what?
It was a statement of fact.
I've been writing open-source software for well over 20 years (actually, well over 30 years –Where does the time go?).
I think I understand the issues involved.