[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       theora
Subject:    [theora] NHW Project - Image comparison
From:       Raphael Canut <nhwcodec () gmail ! com>
Date:       2018-08-04 16:20:10
Message-ID: CAKE58qFuOs=MP6CbL4qc-tyUxuCAnhD8TrXuAnj-eAnvJbxaag () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]


Hello,

Could some of you take a look at the image comparison between the NHW
Project and x265 (HEVC) at high compression, available here:
http://nhwcodec.blogspot.com/ .

I would be very very interested in your opinion, and it would help me to
perfect the NHW Project.For me the NHW Project has more neatness, and x265
has more precision.

Else, I was a little lazy these past months, as I didn't work on the
codec.It mainly remains very high compression, and my idea would be, a
little like HEVC, to strongly remove the details inside the contours of
image, and maintains sharp and clean edges, contours.What would you think
of it? Would you have some algorithm ideas?

Else it is very hard to find some interest for the NHW Project, few days
ago I posted on the IETF video-codec mailing list but couldn't have any
answer, interest...

I still think that the NHW Project could be a good codec for mobile,
embedded devices as it has a very low power and ressource consumption.

For remind and for those who didn't read my previous post, here are salient
features and speed timings between the NHW Project and x265 codecs:

For encoding, the NHW Project (with all the expensive processings turned
on: pre-processing, feedback correction, residual coding, dithering,...)
takes 30ms to encode a 512x512 24bit bitmap image, and the x265 codec takes
300ms to encode that same ppm image.

For decoding, the NHW Project (with all the expensive processing turned on:
post-processing, UV comp sharpening,...) takes 10ms to decode the image,
and the x265 codec takes 30ms to decode that same ppm image.

As a remark, the x265 codec is highly highly optimized, notably SIMD and
multithreading, and the NHW Project has absolutely no optimization (pure C
unoptimized code).So with the same optimizations as x265 codec (x5), the
NHW Project is at least 50x faster to encode and at least 15x faster to
decode than x265 codec (HEVC)!!!

Any opinion, feedback are very welcome!

Many thanks!
Cheers,
Raphael

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<div dir="ltr"><div>Hello,</div><div><br></div><div>Could some of you take a look at \
the image comparison between the NHW Project and x265 (HEVC) at high compression, \
available here: <a href="http://nhwcodec.blogspot.com/">http://nhwcodec.blogspot.com/</a> \
.</div><div><br></div><div>I would be very very interested in your opinion, and it \
would help me to perfect the NHW Project.For me the NHW Project has more neatness, \
and x265 has more precision.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Else, I was a little lazy \
these past months, as I didn&#39;t work on the codec.It mainly remains very high \
compression, and my idea would be, a little like HEVC, to strongly remove the details \
inside the contours of image, and maintains sharp and clean edges, contours.What \
would you think of it? Would you have some algorithm \
ideas?</div><div><br></div><div>Else it is very hard to find some interest for the \
NHW Project, few days ago I posted on the IETF video-codec mailing list but \
couldn&#39;t have any answer, interest... <br></div><div><br></div><div>I still think \
that the NHW Project could be a good codec for mobile, embedded devices as it has a \
very low power and ressource consumption.</div><div><br></div><div>For remind and for \
those who didn&#39;t read my previous post, here are salient features and speed \
timings between the NHW Project and x265 codecs:</div><div><br></div><div>For \
encoding, the NHW Project (with all the expensive processings turned on: \
pre-processing, feedback correction, residual coding, dithering,...) takes 30ms to \
encode a 512x512 24bit bitmap image, and the x265 codec takes 300ms to encode that \
same ppm image.</div><div><br></div><div>For decoding, the NHW Project (with all the \
expensive processing turned on: post-processing, UV comp sharpening,...) takes 10ms \
to decode the image, and the x265 codec takes 30ms to decode that same ppm \
image.</div><div><br></div><div>As a remark, the x265 codec is highly highly \
optimized, notably SIMD and multithreading, and the NHW Project has absolutely no \
optimization (pure C unoptimized code).So with the same optimizations as x265 codec \
(x5), the NHW Project is at least 50x faster to encode and at least 15x faster to \
decode than x265 codec (HEVC)!!!</div><div><br></div><div>Any opinion, feedback are \
very welcome!</div><div><br></div><div>Many \
thanks!</div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Raphael<br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div>



[Attachment #6 (text/plain)]

_______________________________________________
theora mailing list
theora@xiph.org
http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/theora


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]