<div dir="ltr"><div>Hello,</div><div> </div><div>Just a quick message to let you know that I have improved my algorithm.Now, I apply the post-processing function of the decoder on the 512x256 wavelet image (half wavelet synthesis) rather than on the whole 512x512 reconstructed Y comp.Results (on all quality settings) seem to be visually better, more neatness and more precision (this is also -slightly- confirmed with PSNR).</div>
<div> </div><div>So after few tests, I have updated the demo page with this new version.Any comment is welcome.</div><div> </div><div>Raphael</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/5/29 Raphael Canut <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nhwcodec@gmail.com" target="_blank">nhwcodec@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Hello,</div><div> </div><div>I have finally added 2 lower quality settings for the NHW codec: -l1 (-5Ko) and -l2 (-10Ko).I use a quantization of 0.935 and 0.88 (kind of quantization), and I decrease residual coding on the first order wavelet image.</div>
<div> </div><div>I have updated the demo page: <a href="http://nhwcodec.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://nhwcodec.blogspot.com/</a> .</div><div> </div><div>These 2 lower quality settings are still experimental.If you could find time, would be interested in any opinion on this approach, and if it could be acceptable or not? Because lower quality settings seem quite difficult with my algorithm... -I prefer not remove higher wavelet coeffs for these 2 settings...-</div>
<div> </div><div>Many thanks,</div><div>Raphael</div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>