[vorbis-dev] More Ogg Video discussion

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 05:33:18PM -0400, Kenneth Arnold wrote:
> Yup. But unless I've missed some very important development, no algorithm
> is yet perfect. A 3D transform may (hypothetically here) not be able to
> capture some specific sort of data as well as an I/P (and maybe B). Perhaps
> the best thing to do would be to allow for those sorts of "legacy"-type
> codes, but optimize the encoder for whatever works better most of the time.
> Or better, loosen the I/P concept to not just raw video data, but perhaps
> parameters for the 3d transforms or the left-over data after doing the
> 3D transforms, or various other metadata, whatever can be thought of.

We just need to convince everyone that they need 120frame/sec video. 'Depth'
aliasing is a issue for effective continuous 3d transforms. 

3D dct methods would probably be quite sufficient if we had sufficient
temporal resolution.

Witness the use of 3d transforms in tomographic data vs video.

I'm not aware of any video codec which uses 3d transforms in place of
predictive coding even though it's a very active field (and people there
don't seem afraid of strange methods:
http://ulli.linuxave.net/fiasco/thesis.html (Low Bit-Rate Image and Video
Coding with Weighted Finite Automata )) but I've seen several lossy and
lossless codecs for MRI data using 3d transforms.


<HR NOSHADE>
<UL>
<LI>application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
</UL>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: part
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 423 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/vorbis-dev/attachments/20000914/84150893/part-0001.obj