<div>Hello,</div><div> </div><div>Just a quick message to let you know that I have improved precision of my codec (on the encoder and decoder).I have also updated 2 new test images on my demo page...</div><div> </div><div>
I still don't have made an image comparison, but I have re-tested Google WebP on more images, and WebP is very good.</div><div> </div><div>Don't know what kind of interest projects like mine could have, but however if you found time to take a quick look, any comment, suggestion,... is still very welcome.</div>
<div> </div><div>Many thanks,</div><div>Raphael<br><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">2012/7/25 Raphael Canut <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nhwcodec@gmail.com" target="_blank">nhwcodec@gmail.com</a>></span><br><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">
<div>Hi again,</div><div> </div><div>I have improved precision of my codec (on the encoder and decoder).I have also improved the -h1 quality setting.-Source code and binaries at <a href="http://nhwcodec.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://nhwcodec.blogspot.com/</a> -.</div>
<div> </div><div>I am still trying to improve precision of my codec, with keeping my low-complexity (fast) approach.</div><div>I do not totally use the reference (and impressive) block prediction with different modes + residual coding scheme, but I just apply residual coding on the first order wavelet "image" (for example for a 512x512 image, I just code the errors on the 256x256 wavelet "high-resolution" part), hence the lack of precision.I try to compensate it with a little more neatness of the wavelet 5/3 filterbank, but that's right that precision seems visually more important.</div>
<div> </div><div>Any opinion on this approach or on the codec in general is very welcome.</div><div> </div><div>Many thanks again,</div><div>Raphael</div>
</blockquote></div><br>