[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/g/ - Technology


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


>H.264/AVC
>2003 (23 years ago)

What went so right here?
>>
>still patent-encumbered and non-free

What went so wrong here?
>>
It works well for 1080p and you don't really need more for watching series on a TV.
>>
File: 1767270211169409.jpg (326 KB, 828x795)
326 KB JPG
>>108627566
Wouldn't you expect maturity from such an old technology?
>>
>>108627566
What's right? It's practically not used anymore. We only keep this shit for backwards compatibility with older devices.
>>
>>108628228
What's your alternative?
>>
>>108628298
Hevc, vp9, av1
>>
>>108627566
if it existed in 2003 why was everything using divx?
>>
It was a genuine leap from everything before and everything since has either been to absolutely bit starve the video and smear it beyond belief or was a minor upgrade in comparison.
>>
>>108628358
If you used the tools available at the time, it took a quadrillion years to encode a movie... I bet someone's P4 is STILL crunching away at an encode to this very day.
>>
>>108628394
>It was a genuine leap from everything before and everything since has either been to absolutely bit starve the video and smear it beyond belief or was a minor upgrade in comparison.
This. Why can't there be a genuine improvement in video compression that doesn't start from the framework of blurring things by default?
>>
>>108628457
My uneducated guess would be that as the bitrates get lower and lower, quantization becomes more and more aggressive leading to blocking like you'd get in H.264 so newer codecs have chosen to prefer blurring over blocking.
>>
>>108627767
so?
>>
File: 1517893385623.jpg (214 KB, 345x336)
214 KB JPG
>>108627566
Wait till you find out about mp3
>>
it just works
>>
x264 is what went right. unadulterated autistic weeb programming, great software well-made. too bad Dark Shikari trooned out.
>>
i do not miss the divx/xvid era and other random codecs you had to hunt for
>>
>>108628228
>It's practically not used anymore
still used all over the world. stop smoking crack.

>>108629077
just does
>>
>>108629513
the only people that miss that era are retards
>>
>>108627566
it encodes faster than plays back
>>
>>108629572
>still used all over the world.
Where? YouTube serves vp9/av1 by default. Streaming services like Netflix providing content in hevc. Apple smartphones and most Android smartphones record in HEVC. Most new movie releases are in HEVC, sometimes AV1, HDR scene is entirely in HEVC/AV1.
Where do you even find h264 content nowadays except for legacy shit?
>>
>>108629088
>Dark Shikari
All the people from that time are gone and it makes me nostalgic and sad as fuck. And there's nothing more pathetic than a crying boomer.
>>
>>108629611
>bit starved HEVC/AV1
>VP9 in general (what the fuck)
No wonder everything looks like dog shit these days.
>>
>>108627767
its been over 20 years since the filing date, the patent has long expired
>>
File: 1772644151685862.png (391 KB, 853x738)
391 KB PNG
Truth/cuck/black/red/whater-pill: It's only good of your display is a piece of shit like and old CRT, $20 monitor from goodwill.
>>
>>108628394
>>108628457
That's just not true
The compression ratios of modern encoders are leagues better than H.264, it's just that all those size savings immediately go into lowering the bitrate so there's there's fuck all difference visually for end-users
>>
>>108629928
see post above you

Would have been cool if 10-bit H.264 had become a thing thoughbeit.
>>
>>108629619
Anon, I won't hold it against you if you crack open a monster for old time sake and remember the good old days.
>>
>>108629650
for baseline, which no one uses
>>
>>108629513
divx/xvid is the one/before h.264/avc. divx/xvid is mpeg-4 part 2 and avc is part 10.
>>108627566
x264 is what went so right, once x264 got gud around 2006/2007 it kicked every other codecs' ass
>>
>>108628358
that's like asking where all the 2018 av1 encodes are
>>
>>108628501
>>108629928

This.

But aren't we all forced to do that?

For example, the “walled garden” of Telegram does not let an anonymous reader view a video file (replaces the video player with “Media is too big” and the button “VIEW IN TELEGRAM”) unless the gile is not greater than 15 megabytes.

And if I have to put a video quote of 6:55 in that very space, then we have only 303 kbps.

Thank goodness we have AV1.

Can't wait for SVT-AV2.
>>
>>108627566
Simple and fast to encode, making it the go to format for recorders.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.