Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Compression, Math & the Internet

My M.Sc. (physics) was in hyperpolarized 129Xe nuclear magnetic resonance imaging. My Ph.D. (engineering physics) is in progress, and has to do with magnetic non-destructive evaluation.

During my spare time in my M.Sc. program I took up video and visual effects, through which most of the work was done in MatLAB using the Image Processing Toolbox. In my search for more versatile tools I ended up moving to After Effects.

Since I'm generally more interested in the technical aspects of image production, my curiosity led me through the available technologies from miniDV to RED.
 
karapetkov said:
It'd be super cool if Jim resurrects HD-DVD for RED RAY and focks Sony good.
Click to expand...

I am sure Toshiba will GLADLY sell the entire HD-DVD division with all IP and manufacturing plant to Jim for peanuts. You might be onto something here! :clown2:
 
Me hopes.

If they can cram 2 hrs. of 4K in a single DVD9[how da hell?!!!], the 25Gb of HD-DVD would be paradise.

But hey, I already got a DVD Burner ;).
 
karapetkov said:
Me hopes.

If they can cram 2 hrs. of 4K in a single DVD9[how da hell?!!!], the 25Gb of HD-DVD would be paradise.

But hey, I already got a DVD Burner ;).
Click to expand...

That's the great thing about HD-DVD - the authoring process is almost identical to DVD and the drives are backwards compatible. Moreover, unlike Blu-Ray, the manufacturing cost of HD-DVD is cheap as hell!

Notice that DVD Studio Pro (from Apple, originally Spruce Technology's DVD Maestro) had a HD-DVD option build in even before HD-DVD came onto market!

Now this would actually make sense to resurrect it (as all the BRAND NEW infrastructure is still there available) and re-brand it Red-Ray!

You rock Karapetkov!
 
Blu-Ray has been expensive due to the discwar and there's no difference between authoring for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray

Also, Blu-Ray already won so why bother?
 
karapetkov said:
No, what I meant was to just use the media [and its capacity], not the codec.

HD-DVD discs + RED RAY Codec.
Click to expand...

Sure fire way to make RED RAY fail... Having a format that everyone can already burn is what makes it incredible. Even with Blu-Ray it would be OK (well, it would be excellent - 50GB disks...), because like DVD burners, every computer will have one in two or three years.

Using a dead format makes zero sense. Who would want to scour ebay to try and find an HD-DVD burner so they could use RED RAY? I doubt there would be enough demand for Toshiba to keep making burners...
 
Glazarus said:
Blu-Ray has been expensive due to the discwar and there's no difference between authoring for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.
Click to expand...

But if You wanna get started - here is why You are wrong:

HD-DVD was so much more popular with the DVD factories as it allowed them to re-use much of their current infrastructure. Not so with Blu-Ray. DARKKELT have made the same point: "500 dvd's with 4 colour artwork and case only costs about $1000. if you wanted 500 blu rays right now you're looking at 30 to 40 grand. not so much because the individual replication costs a lot but because the optical master costs a lot." HD-DVD is less then half of the Blu-Ray for both glass master and individual media duplication...
 
Well, I dunno, a lot of people already seem to have HD-DVD players [do these have upgradeable firmware?!].

And RED-RAY seems to be a pro application, not a consumer one like BluRay 1080p movies.

It's 4K! I can't see 4K becoming a consumer thing anytime soon [but maybe Jannard has a different opinion on that :) ].

And it's a digital cinema specification - 2K DCI, 4K DCI... - not a home video specification: 720p, 1080p.

30 Gb of RED-RAY encoded 4K, that's three times the capacity of DVD9 [2hrs. of 4K].

And they can rename it "4K-DVD" :), cause it would actually become exactly this.

Or simply "4K", which is even easier and cooler to say than "BluRay" - say BluRay 10 times, and then say 4K ten times :)... well they're almost the same, but 4K sounds more straight and also sounds like "more" :). People always like to have "more", you know? Lol.

So, 1080p consumer Sony BluRay and 4K [HD-DVD] RED-RAY pro application.

But maybe the difference between home video and digital cinema formats will disappear.

Actually, I think that the future belongs to Digital Cinema Wars: Attack of the Codecs.

And not so much to physical media differences.

Lol.
 
Hm. No one has latched on to the end of my initial post.

Does it really matter if RED RAY burnable to DVD? A lot of people think that broad-band or re-writeable flash distribution will be the death knell for disc-based formats.

The data rates RED RAY proposes are already reasonable for internet downloads, as there are a number of services that routinely enable 5-10 GB downloads (Steam for example). Furthermore, if RED manages to address the streaming issues Joofa discussed earlier in the thread, one could see RED RAY becoming both a broadcast and internet streaming codec.

As for RED RAY and digital cinema projection... I'm a huge sceptic on this. Cinemas need to keep the quality of their presentation higher than can be achieved in the home. One way to do this is to go to higher fidelity distribution codecs. I can't really see digital cinemas going for anything but a visually lossless, high chroma codec. Based upon my limited knowledge of compression, I don't see how this is possible with the current RED RAY specifications.
 
Spiff said:
A scholar.google.com search for "temporal compression wavelet" produces some 13,800 hits... so clearly some folks have been thinking about such things.
Click to expand...

Yes, I would not be surprised by this fact. There is an over saturation of publications these days. There is a widening rift between the engineering departments in US universities and where the industry is headed. These people don't talk with each other much. People in academia try to solve problems (sometimes known as "manufactured problems") which have not applicability or need in the industry. People in the industry try to solve problems without knowing that solutions to such problems already exist in academia.

We were on the subject of Wavelets. I am always surprised that how many times that subject is resurrected. Daubechies and others seemingly "re-invented" wavelets perhaps realizing much later electrical engineers were working on Quadrature Mirror Filters (QMFs) a long time ago and they are deceptively close to wavelets. Time-frequency analysis that forms the backbone to wavelets can be traced all the way back to Hisenberg uncertainty principle and the coherent states in Physics. Gabor's famous work was forgotten until over-sampling resurrected it.

In computer graphics some of the seemingly amazing findings were known to electrical engineers for ages long ago.

Parochial vision, narrow focus and "publish or perish" philosophy so prevalent now has resulted in all this mess.
 
What you say of academia is true.

In the end a lot of this stuff is just applied mathematics. However, each application of the math usually comes associated with its own jargon. I frequently find myself looking through publications and catalogues, but don't have the benefit of knowing the correct search term.

I work on something for a couple of months, and then come up with a 'new' way to describe it. I then type those word combinations into the search engines, and a whole new set of papers pops out of the aether.

Would that academic institutions rewarded quality over quantity. The only problem is that quality is much harder to estimate.
 
Would compression artifacts distort 3D image?

Would compression artifacts distort 3D image?

Hi! I don't post here often, but have followed the Red forum almost from the start. I see people discuss the data compression of Red Ray and wonder how the Red Ray will work its magic. I have another question: If two Red Rays can be linked for 3D projection (which I read some speculation about in another thread), won't the compression artifacts from the high compression ratios you guys are mentioning distort and destroy the 3D image?

Sindre Saebo
Oslo, Norway
 
Spiff said:
Just to be picky, I don't like this phrase. You can fit 9 GB of data on a 9 GB disk. What we're concerned about is how much data you can to represent with 9 GB.

It's obvious that you can stick a whole movie onto 9 GB - it's been done for years. What RED RAY offers is an opportunity to make that 9 GB yield a prettier image than the DVD MPEG-2 codec.

I'm awfully tired of picking out compression and edge enhancement artifacts from video. However, I'm not interested in blaming monitors for showing me compression artifacts. I want the display makers to try their best to accurately display their source, and if that source is loaded with errors, I'd like to know.

I hope RED RAY doesn't come with a whole slew of compression artifacts. I assume we won't see macro-blocking and mosquito noise. I assume softening and blur are "better" since they are less noticeable.

Ultimately however, I'd like my eyes to be the limiting factor with my motion picture displays. Right now, that doesn't appear to be the case. As a result, I still haven't purchased an HDTV.
Click to expand...


Lets assume it uses a wavelet compression system. Wavelet compression doesn`t tend to create blocking errors because it doesn`t break images into blocks and apply different quantization levels to different blocks. What you`d get with tiny data rates is jpeg2000 style blurriness I think.
Wavelet compression systems are the best we have at the moment, even for lossless data compression. If someone created an intra-frame wavelet compression system, image data could get seriously squeezed, and artifacts minimized. I don`t know if the RedRay compression will be wavelet based or not, or whether it will use temporal compression, but I hope both, because the image will be packed with only relevant visual detail because wavelets are better at throwing away noise, and the data stream could get very small. 9gig could hold a lot of 4k visuals. I don`t see any reason why LCD, Plasma or whatever screens can`t increase in size?
 
ronx said:
If someone created an intra-frame wavelet compression system, image data could get seriously squeezed, and artifacts minimized.
Click to expand...

Some one already has. And it's free...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/projects/dirac/index.shtml

I wonder if Red is just recycling Dirac as "RedRay codec" the way they recycled JPEG2000 as "Redcode"? I for one would very much like to see a RAW flavor of Dirac and a company pushing for it's adaptation. Honestly I'm surprised Red didn't just go with Dirac from the start.
 
Spiff said:
A lot of people think that broad-band or re-writeable flash distribution will be the death knell for disc-based formats.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I looks like Sony is starting to think this way now. Hence, BD-live.
Link your Blue-Ray disk to downloadable content. It won't be long before the Blue-Ray players just become another apple-TV box.
Can someone say Blue-TV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top