User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Confusing MPEG and MPEG-LA

Confusing MPEG and MPEG-LA

Posted May 25, 2010 23:22 UTC (Tue) by Tester (guest, #40675)
Parent article: Swift and predictable reactions to WebM

First, you seem to be confusing MPEG (the Moving Picture Experts Group) which is a group inside ISO that defines standards like MPEG 1, 2 and 4. This is a non-profit group that writes technical standards. And then there is MPEG-LA, which is an unrelated for-profit corporation that provides patent licensing services to its members.

Second, if you read Jason's blog post correctly, he's not saying VP8 sucks. He's saying that, as a codecs geek, he's disappointed to see that there is nothing new and exciting in there, but that instead, they've applied known techniques. The On2 marketing people had claimed to be much better than H.264, but he did not see anything in there to warrant that.


(Log in to post comments)

Confusing MPEG and MPEG-LA

Posted May 26, 2010 0:46 UTC (Wed) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]

His test wasn't fair either. His comparisons were done with completely different settings. You can't put one on maximum compression, and another on maximum image quality then compare image quality and bash the other codec. His article was decidedly biased and he cooked the results from the codec's with different optimizations and settings to get what he wanted.

Personally I wouldn't be surprised if MPEG-LA paid him money to write the article. These days most articles of this nature are usually part of a paid advertising/FUD campaign. Only neutral sources where the entire (including all settings) testing procedure is documented should be trusted.

Confusing MPEG and MPEG-LA

Posted May 26, 2010 1:00 UTC (Wed) by DonDiego (guest, #24141) [Link]

This is preposterous nonsense. Google gave Jason access to VP8 under NDA prior to releasing it so that he could study and comment on it. If somebody studies VP8 and the result is not what you would like it to be, conspiracy is very much not the only sensible explanation.

Confusing MPEG and MPEG-LA

Posted May 26, 2010 1:08 UTC (Wed) by Tester (guest, #40675) [Link]

In his basic comparison, he puts all of the codecs in maximum PSNR mode. I don't see him putting one at high and one at low quality. And he basically says that the result of the VP8 encoder is almost as good as x264's encoding in H.264 baseline.

And Jason is anything but a fan of the MPEG-LA.

Confusing MPEG and MPEG-LA

Posted May 27, 2010 3:16 UTC (Thu) by roc (subscriber, #30627) [Link]

No, he says it's better than H.264 baseline.

Confusing MPEG and MPEG-LA

Posted May 26, 2010 4:48 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

> Personally I wouldn't be surprised if MPEG-LA paid him money to write the article.

Attempting to destroying or damage a messenger's reputation because he expressed a message you did not like is a very very lousy way to improve the quality of a video codec.

Confusing MPEG and MPEG-LA

Posted May 26, 2010 10:22 UTC (Wed) by bawjaws (guest, #56952) [Link]

A related quote on damaging reputations from Dark Shikari:

"Xiph [is disliked because of] the methods that Xiph uses to market their bad technology. They have at times posted outright lies about their software and then, once proven wrong, often refuse to recant. Example: the Theora vs x264 PSNR comparison where they "accidentally" performed measurement wrong, making x264 appear 2x worse.

They use the same techniques as many of the more evil commercial companies out there, which annoys the hell out of people who disagree with such techniques. ffmpeg devs believe that open source should be about honesty and good technology, not lies and FUD. Xiph disagrees, believing that "the ends justify the means", creating a practically unbridgeable gulf.

Thus Xiph has spent the last few years spreading absurd amounts of FUD about everyone who they believe opposes them."

from here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1164764

It appears the shoe is on the other foot now that the discussion has moved from quality to patents and his own project looks to come off worst. He's posted minor updates to his piece about certain patent areas he commented on, but his conclusions still stand uncorrected and I think you'll find his words quoted all across the internet on the patent situation with regards to VP8, something which he clearly isn't an expert on.

Confusing MPEG and MPEG-LA

Posted May 26, 2010 17:25 UTC (Wed) by gmaxwell (guest, #30048) [Link]

I'm pretty sure that Jason would no longer stand by that statement-- he was simply blowing off steam there. I think that we have a good working relationship with him. It's a bit unfortunate that every comment one of makes on an obscure forum or mailing list will forever be quoted as some kind of official statement.

The comparison he did with VP8 wasn't unfair but it is important to understand it for what it is: A comparison between something very mature and well developed with something very new and raw. Even given that VP8 did reasonably well- it was quite competitive with x264's baseline profile encode.

Confusing MPEG and MPEG-LA

Posted Jun 3, 2010 17:30 UTC (Thu) by n8willis (subscriber, #43041) [Link]

I'm not the least bit confused about the differences between MPEG and MPEG-LA. All of the statements cited were by MPEG-LA and Larry Horn; MPEG itself had no direct connection to the story, and was not mentioned in it.

Nate


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds