Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality (was: I'd love it if patents evaporated)
cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> Fri, 15 November 2013 13:53 UTC
Return-Path: <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 271AA11E81A2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 05:53:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_45=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kSFK4ezYvVfh for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 05:53:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ie0-f172.google.com (mail-ie0-f172.google.com [209.85.223.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1CC111E818C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 05:53:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ie0-f172.google.com with SMTP id to1so4731248ieb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 05:53:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=vNT3bywsQKqxPMqaghpnmc6XSOPEepnAM3ovzVuFSCE=; b=UnPN/jeaDGl5VoaDXVruAgF6ZR1ESmXw//aoKZfu32zq7f9FTopTJUbGT+4n73Vnf9 59dQnDjYFcrfBIUfykNmUdbV8s6sAqNaeLMxdvwwD3IuI9ZaGQRIB42jBpvoCnPMjSe/ i48T1qVK9t5rhPaQE7sdfgsS8g8KQVsG8wMeRMu2ONb3mCXGSW7+j1L3zLxNUcnwe1wW c1kEVZpAb2ljsS5t7V4/GdTJJJOWk8Ns4OxLOWerc2Z/5yGK9DV2u+q141rm0f3Hj2oE 0swIcsEI5hrTx8jWKnA+itOE4+bOZE4NhfeY+MwAHvpY6puVi73EWlPm3X3gQwMwM7Tv Hm7g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmNFFgH8jEowOR+px2Z6TQElc/jRIvVPiZESGXRv6lQMmiaKHxztTML1OvIAGl3QMColUS2
X-Received: by 10.50.141.133 with SMTP id ro5mr4499493igb.35.1384523581452; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 05:53:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (206-248-171-209.dsl.teksavvy.com. [206.248.171.209]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id hv5sm3214008igb.9.2013.11.15.05.53.00 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Nov 2013 05:53:00 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <5286272B.5000005@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 08:52:43 -0500
From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <5284AB73.5030505@googlemail.com> <5285209D.7020407@googlemail.com> <CAGgHUiSROwRznKZWD4kjn8Vu7SrUVwOnHN1EJ-PTgR=WQmcxAQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-2najyMhcVNC8r0Sg+8xgkgDwasBSz476zA0BEpi2X5Pg@mail.gmail.com> <528559E4.3020903@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <528559E4.3020903@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090605020506010408070303"
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality (was: I'd love it if patents evaporated)
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 13:53:06 -0000
Excellent work Adam. I can't speak for others, but at 254 kbps (corrected figure from your follow-up post) H.261 is definitely "good enough" and better than an audio-only connection. Gili On 14/11/2013 6:16 PM, Adam Roach wrote: > I sent a reply to this earlier, but just now realized that it went > only to Justin, not to the list. > > > On 11/14/13 13:59, Justin Uberti wrote: >> Thanks, this is interesting. Is the ffmpeg 261 encoder limited to >> CIF/QCIF, or can you specify arbitrary sizes? > > It looks like the ffmpeg mpeg-1 coder works for arbitrary sizes. I'm > not sure what the difference between mpeg-1 and H.261 are, though, so > we could be talking apples and oranges (or at least apples and pears) > here. I'll note that mpeg-1 came out in 1991, which is a good 22 years > in the past. I'm not drawing IPR conclusions for you, but invite you > to ponder the implications yourself. > > Following Maik's lead with the mpeg-1 js decoder, I put this together: > > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53717247/mpg/maven.html > > ...with this commandline: > > ffmpeg -i maven.mp4 -f mpeg1video -flags qprd -mbd rd -cmp rd > -subcmp rd -mbcmp rd -precmp rd -trellis 2 -g 100 -vb 256k maven.mpg > > I don't really understand most of those options (I just cribbed them > from Maik's example) or whether any of them would introduce more > latency than is reasonable for a real-time conversation, but I will > observe: > > 1. The encoder claims that it was performing on the order of 90 - 100 > fps on my (admittedly modern) system; > 2. The resolution is 640x360 (somewhat larger than DCIF); > 3. The video is not, to my eye, unusable (draw your own conclusions, > as it's clearly not as nice as modern codecs); > 4. At 74 seconds and 4.7 MBytes (i.e., 37.6 Mbits), this encoding > works out to 508 kbits/second total. > > > Source video here, and NASA is acknowledged as the source of the > material contained therein: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijAO0FFExx0 > > /a > > > > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality (was: I'd … Leon Geyser
- [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality (was: I'd love… Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality (was: I'd … Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Gili
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality (was: I'd … Justin Uberti
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Gili
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality (was: I'd … Adam Roach
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Adam Roach
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Stephan Wenger
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Leon Geyser
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Monty Montgomery
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Leon Geyser
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality (was: I'd … cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality (was: I'd … Justin Uberti
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Adam Roach
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality (was: I'd … Justin Uberti
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Stephan Wenger
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Gunnar Hellstrom
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Randell Jesup
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Adam Roach
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Stephan Wenger
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Toerless Eckert
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Toerless Eckert
- Re: [rtcweb] H261/MPEG-1 video quality Maik Merten
- [rtcweb] Trellis IPR status? (Re: H261/MPEG-1 vid… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Trellis IPR status? (Re: H261/MPEG-1… Maik Merten
- Re: [rtcweb] Trellis IPR status? (Re: H261/MPEG-1… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Trellis IPR status? (Re: H261/MPEG-1… Maik Merten