Re: [rtcweb] MTI motion JPEG

Yes, I guess you're right, this is out of scope. It's just that its 
tempting to come up with ideas for improvements, given the low-hanging 
fruits in case of MJPEG are basically touching the ground.

Maik

Am 02.12.2013 10:50, schrieb Harald Alvestrand:
> Designing new video codecs is something that I don't think we should do
> in this WG at this time.
>
>
> On 12/01/2013 12:46 AM, Maik Merten wrote:
>> Am 30.11.2013 01:49, schrieb Ralph Giles:
>>> I'd like propose motion JPEG as the manditory-to-implement video codec,
>>> per RFC 2435 or similar.
>>
>> Is it feasible to extend the RFC with, e.g., a run-length coded list
>> of skipped MCUs ("macroblocks")? Picture data for those would be
>> copied over from the last frame. This may even work with unmodified
>> JPEG decoders (either by filling in stub data for the skipped MCUs at
>> the receiving end or by encoding skipped MCUs compact run of zeroed
>> coefficents) and a postprocessing step.
>>
>> (If coding an explicit list of skipped MCUs is not practical, one can
>> regard MCUs with all-zero coefficients as "skipped". An encoder will
>> have to take this into account so no MCUs are skipped by accident,
>> though.)
>>
>> This contradicts the minimal-effort argument to some degree, but at
>> least this would enable efficient transmission of screencasts,
>> increase coding efficiency for "talking head" content, and offer
>> additional means for bitrate management (partial screen updates).
>>
>>
>>
>> Maik
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb