Hi On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 07:47:38PM +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: > On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > > -> some signals simply can be represented much more compactly in the > > wavelet domain if they are shifted a little > > > > if we now always encode images with the same shift then there is a much > > higher chance that some signals will be always hard to store, if OTOH > > we flip the wavelet after each frame then what cannot easily be stored > > (= gets quantized to 0) in the even frames can with some luck more easily > > be stored in the odd frames > > So if I get this right; if this is tied to a local motion predictor which > results a local direction. It could find the optimal local shift? > > Or wouldn't this be possible because the wavelet will be rotated and > cannot be applied to the image in decoding. I'm surprised a fixed 180 > degree turn 'just' works better. i dont see how this could be done easily locally, at least not without sideeffects like blocking artefacts ... [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Breaking DRM is a little like attempting to break through a door even though the window is wide open and the only thing in the house is a bunch of things you dont want and which you would get tomorrow for free anyway -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20070102/ab3fa7e2/attachment.pgp>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4