I ain't upgrading until hardware decoding and encoding of av1 is a thing. fuck you

>why don't you like a literal botnet

x264 is a free encoder for AVC. AVC itself isn't an open standard.

what does this mean?

You are liable for patent royalties due to usage of x264

AVC, HEVC, etc. are protected by patents while open standards like VP8, VP9, AV1 are not (actually it's a bit more complicated afaik, but basically everyone is allowed to implement them and doesn't have to worry about licensing issues, royalties, etc.).

Freetards everybody.

that's for public commers right? to x264 or to h264?

>tripfag wants attention
Not even worth a (you)

>being this retarded
Tripfags everybody.
AV1 is simply superior to HEVC, freetards have nothing to do with it.

WebP is utter disaster

Attached: comp.jpg (1280x720, 598K)

Right, because we all have our own personal 1 million cpu core server setup and a mini nuclear power plant to feed it.

It still beats JPG and PNG which is all that matters desu. Also stop pretending that people are going to transcode a webp image over and over again, the file sizes are already low.

Attached: 73d0518a7de54abf86df3ba82e3b0760.png (1422x1600, 1.77M)

We've been through this already.
a) outdated libwebp version
b) test completely ignores the file size (which of course favors FLIF as it can't produce nearly as small files as WebP or BPG)
c) FLIF's lossy encoding is rather a lossy optimization and barely discards data after a while
d) FLIF's strongest defense against repeated lossy compression is that lossy FLIF transcoding corrupts the image (you have to go FLIF -> PNG -> FLIF)

Btw here's another quick comparison. FLIF transcoded 207 times with Q0 (so basically worst case scenario). Each WebP iteration tried to reach roughly the same file size (via cwebp's -size option).
FLIF: my.mixtape.moe/mxjeqh.png (converted to PNG because next to nothing can display FLIF)
WebP: my.mixtape.moe/cxhgly.webp

Attached: comparison.png (1920x1025, 1.73M)

Fuck. Forgot to link the original:
my.mixtape.moe/boeatp.jpg

>Right, because we all have our own personal 1 million cpu core server setup and a mini nuclear power plant to feed it.
not him but that's why i'm waiting for hardware decoding and encoding support. big names are backing development for this codec so it's ought to go somewhere.
it's fine for

>it's fine for

>hardware decoding and encoding of av1
all avalable "hardware decoders" is just some software for GPU
can do it on GeForce 8800 GS but nvidia want sell new GPUs

Just wait for AVIF

>AVIF support
>On December 14th 2018 Netflix published the first .avif sample images[125] and support was added in VLC.[126][127] Microsoft also announced support with the Windows 10 "19h1" preview release, including File Explorer, Paint and multiple API's[128], together with some sample images[129]. Mozilla is also working on support for the new image format in Firefox.[130]

HW decoding defeats the purpose of a better codec because it will require 8-10X higher bitrate than software encoding. What good is AV1 if it still can't even match HEVC realtime 1080p SW encoding on soon to be $100 processors?

Attached: Screenshot_2019-01-02-13-03-57(1).jpg (720x1072, 253K)

*encoding

Just use Ogg/Theora in MKV. Free across the board.

>including File Explorer, Paint
Imagine 10bit color scales in paint. Imagine replacing all those folder.jpg with folder.avif

Good times ahead.

actually, what happen to Theora? isnt it open source and royalty free?

To add to this, it looks like this hasn't been updated in forever

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_Ogg_formats_in_HTML5

I guess Theora is dead, along with Ogg

>8-10X higher bitrate
That sounds a bit much. Mind you, I only ever compared lossless SW/HW encoding.

>isnt it open source and royalty free?
Yeah, but it's also pretty shit. If I remember right Theora was derived from VP3.

Well that's the entire point of transcoding video to another format, compressed lossless video is rarely used even for video editing given how many more resources are needed to enc/dec it.

However I will admit there is a point where HW or SW encoding will yield about the same quality at a similar bitrate depending on source but at that point you're usually well above the 20-40 mbps blu-ray bitrate. Most people aim for sub-10mbps bitrates when SW transcoding video making lossy compression efficiency crucial at that point.

How much space would a 2-hour hollywood feature take encoded losslessly in FFV1? A 1080p for example.

well, we do have opus. it's a shame theora died, though.

download.opencontent.netflix.com/?prefix=AV1/Chimera/AVIF/
how do i opne

It's around 200GB for lossless H.264.

>hevc is 50% improvement over avc
>av1 is 30% improvement over hevc
so around 70gb?

No. Lossless is not lossy. Improvements in throwing out data don't necessarily translate into storing all data.

Not exactly, there's only so much you can squeeze out of lossless encoding. YMMV depending on source too. Don't even bother with grainy sources.

AVC is actually more effective than HEVC at high bitrates, especially when it comes to lossless compression. AV1 seems to improve on AVC a little bit, but the focus is still on the lower end of the spectrum.

>According to Mukund Srinivasan, chief business officer of AOM member Ittiam, early hardware support will be dominated by software running on non-CPU hardware (such as GPGPU, DSP or shader programs, as is the case with some VP9 hardware implementations), as fixed-function hardware will take 12–18 months after bitstream freeze until chips are available, plus 6 months for products based on those chips to hit the market. The bitstream was finally frozen on 28 March 2018, meaning chips could be available sometime between March and August 2019. According to the above forecast, products based on chips could then be on the market at the end of 2019 or the beginning of 2020.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AV1#Adoption

Attached: anime girl listening to music.gif (496x278, 859K)

bump

youtube encodes only their hi-res shit with av1. will they do the same with low-res stuff, too? if they do people will be forced to upgrade phones due to them not being able to decode videos without lagging like hell.

>youtube encodes only their hi-res shit with av1

Wait. There's more AV1 than that playlist?

don't quote me on that but i think i read it in their blog. it would be weird since not a whole lot of daily browsers support it, though.

Why? They serve different video/audio codecs. AV1 gets only added to that list.

>it would be weird since not a whole lot of daily browsers support it, though.

because it's still beta opt-in and they keep old+new concurrently

Attached: optin.jpg (999x336, 194K)

bumb