Re:AV1 beats x264 and libvpx-vp9 in practical use case
by LudoA on Wednesday April 11, 2018 @07:51AM
(#16810174)
That's interesting.
But how can an implementation be compatible with a codec, if a codec is not set in the stone -- i.e. if there are different versions of a codec?
Re:AV1 beats x264 and libvpx-vp9 in practical use case
by lultimouomo on Wednesday April 11, 2018 @08:39AM
(#16810475)
It may help to think about video codecs as standards on how to decode images from a series of bits, not on how to encode them.
Decoding is deterministic, encoding is not.
You have to consider that these encoders are lossy, i.e. while encoding they modify the information so that it is more easily compressible. Different encoders will do different choices and produce different result while using the same bitrate.
Obviously encoders are constrained by the fact that they must produce a series of bits that can be decoded according to a certain standard, so a new video format can enable encoders to compress information more efficiently (i.e. less perceptual loss of quality at the same bitrate).
Re:AV1 beats x264 and libvpx-vp9 in practical use case
by LudoA on Wednesday April 11, 2018 @01:56PM
(#16813662)
That makes it clear, thanks!
Re:AV1 beats x264 and libvpx-vp9 in practical use case
by eclee2 on Wednesday April 11, 2018 @09:56AM
(#16811081)
Codec refers to the implementation.
Re:AV1 beats x264 and libvpx-vp9 in practical use case
by lern_too_spel on Wednesday April 11, 2018 @10:41AM
(#16811515)
Thanks. You are correct. I should have said video coding format.
Implementations and encoders actually use algorithms to turn the media into something that is compatible with a codec.