[dead]
Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
61–70 of 144 posts
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#62This reminds me of a scene in "A Fire Upon the Deep" (1992) where they're on a video call with someone on another spaceship; but something seems a bit "off". Then someone notices that the actual bitrate they're getting from the other vessel is tiny -- far lower than they should be getting given the conditions -- and so most of what they're seeing on their own screens isn't actual video feed, but their local computer'…
And also it was a deep fake.
BTW This is the best sci-fi book ever.
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
GP is incorrect. There is "Is identical", "looks identical" and "has lost sufficient detail to clearly not be the original." - being able to differentiate between these three states is useful.
Importantly the first one is parameterless, but the second and third are parameterized by the audience. For example humans don't see colour very well, some animals have much better colour gamut, while some can't distinguish colour at all.
Perceptually lossless (nature for dogs) video compression at 15bit/s.
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#64This reminds me of a scene in "A Fire Upon the Deep" (1992) where they're on a video call with someone on another spaceship; but something seems a bit "off". Then someone notices that the actual bitrate they're getting from the other vessel is tiny -- far lower than they should be getting given the conditions -- and so most of what they're seeing on their own screens isn't actual video feed, but their local computer'…
And also it was a deep fake. BTW This is the best sci-fi book ever.
Might be better if you like space opera style really soft science fiction. I really didn’t enjoy it.
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#65Not quite lossless... look at the bicycle seat behind him. When he tilts his head, the seat moves with his hair.
Very noticeable jitter in bicycle front tire too.
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
GP is incorrect. There is "Is identical", "looks identical" and "has lost sufficient detail to clearly not be the original." - being able to differentiate between these three states is useful.
Lossless means "is identical". The other two are variations of lossy. Calling one of them "perceptually lossless" is cheating, to the disadvantage of algorithms that honestly advertise themselves as lossy while still achieving "looks identical" compression.
I honestly don't notice this anymore. Advertisers have been using such language since time immemorial, to the point it's pretty much a rule that an adjective with a qualifier means "not actually ${adjective}, but kind of like it in ${specific circumstances}". So "perceptually lossless" just means "not actually lossless, except you couldn't tell it from truly lossless just by looking".
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
And also it was a deep fake. BTW This is the best sci-fi book ever.
Might be better if you like space opera style really soft science fiction. I really didn’t enjoy it.
A friend of mine and I both read it about the same time and discussed it afterwards. I thought it was pretty good, he thought it was not that great. What we agreed on was that in spite of there being many fantastic aspects to the book, on the whole it failed to be an awesome novel.
Definitely worth giving it a try if you're a programmer, just for the fact that it's written by another programmer: the opening scene where they find a bunch of rules written down and just follow them reminds me of ACPI; the discussion of public-key cryptography and shipping drives full of one-time-pad around the galaxy; the "compression scheme" with the video.
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
And also it was a deep fake. BTW This is the best sci-fi book ever.
Might be better if you like space opera style really soft science fiction. I really didn’t enjoy it.
Fascinating. Vinge is about the furthest from “soft” sci-fi I can think of. We must have very different definitions of what makes something soft.
It’s certainly true that Vinge doesn’t spend much time on the engineering details, but I find him unusually clear on “imagine if we had this kind of impossible-now technology, but the rest of what we know about physics remained, how would people behave?”
He was, after all, a physics professor.
Rainbow’s End is much clearer on this than his distant future stuff, of course.
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
And also it was a deep fake. BTW This is the best sci-fi book ever.
Might be better if you like space opera style really soft science fiction. I really didn’t enjoy it.
It uses technological differences as key plot and setting components not just space as sea, so it is sci fi but it is improbable in many ways so yea “soft” sci fi or more speculative fiction
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Might be better if you like space opera style really soft science fiction. I really didn’t enjoy it.
A friend of mine and I both read it about the same time and discussed it afterwards. I thought it was pretty good, he thought it was not that great. What we agreed on was that in spite of there being many fantastic aspects to the book, on the whole it failed to be an awesome novel. Definitely worth giving it a try if you're a programmer, just for the fact that it's written by another programmer: the opening scene whe…
I agree that it was good but not particularly great. A Deepness in the Sky, however, is fantastic -- similar in many aspects but just flat out better all around.