Slashdot Mirror
Video Shrinks With MP4
molda writes: "The The BBC is reporting that the New MP4 format is now appearing on websites. The compression routine utilised by MP4 is cable of converting an hours worth of video to a 350mb file. " Until there are cross platform players and encoders I don't see it making each inroads, and there still are some compression issues (but then again, a 128kb/s MP3 wacks out music's treble and bass pretty badly too and that hasn't slowed down its acceptance).
DAT is either 44.1 or 48kHz sampling - peak frequency is ~24kHz... not the sampling rate.
Most CD players apply a fairly high order filter ~20kHz anyway, to block out noise, prevent aliasing, etc...
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
Look, I love open source as much as the next guy, but the fact is that Windows still runs on 90% of the world's desktops. So would that make this kinda like DVD, which is officially limited to Windows. Hell, that never caught on, it's a dead technology. How about .asf format? That's out the door. Come on, you can be a zealot all you want, just make some sense with it.
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
But what about me - I'm a digital audiophile - I demand at least 24/96!
[/OT]
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
Yeah right no cross-platform support is going to slow it down much. Most college-age people, who would use this the most (like MP3), are either running windows systems or linux/windows dual boot.
"MP3 Layer4" ? You're an idiot.
MPEG 1 or 2, or maybe even 1.5 depending on the encoder you're using, but who gives a fuck?
In any case, "MP4" is incorrect, but will be used anyway because, remember, half the human race have below-average intelligence. (George Carlin said that, no?)
It developed the software to compress and decompress video, called a codec, to help the Windows Media Player program handle moving pictures sent over the internet.
I'd like to see the MPAA sue Microsoft for developing code that could potentially make it possible for someone to pirate DVDs. That's what they're suing the DeCSS people for, afterall. I wonder whose laywers will run out of money first....
--GrouchoMarx
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?
What you are doing is cool nonetheless, but Mpeg-1 is not the best format.. there's a lot of quality loss
Well, yeah, there's quality loss. But consider my source material (VHS EP mode). The CD's I'm creating may not be DVD quality, but they are acceptable quality and definitely watchable.
I can easily see DVD players that may allow to play Mpeg-4 formats, amongst other things..
So can I, but they're not here yet. One of my goals for this project was to turn out discs that were playable on _current_ technology. When better solutions appear, maybe I'll start over. Although, the discs I'm creating are very similar in quality to the VHS tapes that I'm pulling the video from.
Of course, right now, mpeg1 (vcd) is one of the only standards. (not all dvd players support it)
Not all, but nearly all. The big problem with homemade VCD is that while most DVD players support the VCD format, only a select few are capable of reading CDR or CDRW media.
The Wizard of Oz? It's ironic that under any sane copyright system, this film would have passed into the public domain long ago. Indeed I expect that in many countries, this is the case.
A Project Gutenberg equivalent (names please?) for old movies and TV programmes might be useful.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
What the hell? What happened to Mpeg-3 than!
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!
(Why was the PlayStation abbreviated to PSX, instead of just PS?)
Because maybe Abode would get a little pissed at it?
--
Marcelo Vanzin
Marcelo Vanzin
Yeah, and Microsoft Office won't gain acceptance until it's cross-platform either.
AC
Actually I think most people will call it "Divx ;)" (which have AVI extensions for some reason). But seriously. Why would you call it MP4? It isn't an "MP4", its an MPEG-4. No one calls MPEG-2 movies MP2s. MP2 is something completly different :) It's easier to remember cuz it has three letters? MPEG-4 and MP4 have the same number of sylabils, so I really don't see how that will work. That's a really silly argument.
DivX installs itself as a standard windows video codec. That means any mpeg conpression software (Xing, panasonic, etc) will give you the option to encode in divX.
Ok, saying "MP3 wacks out music's treble and bass" is pretty inaccurate.
The overall frequency response of MP3 is essentially flat. If you do the standard audio tests of sine waves at various frequencies, you'll get basically perfect fidelity. That's because sine tones are not very complex and thus compress very well.
MP3, like all lossy compression schemes, removes information complexity from the signal, so that it fits into a much smaller bitrate channel. The function of the magical "psycho-acoustic model" is to separate out the complexity that you can hear easily (for example, the attack on a snare drum) from complexity that you can't (ie small signals at frequencies that are close to frequency peaks, so are masked out). At any given bitrate, MP3 encodes as much as possible of the former signal and ditches the rest. The higher the bitrate, the more gets encoded.
Now, that said, at 128kbps, the better quality MP3 encoders suppress frequencies higher than 16kHz. The reasoning for this is very sound: most people (myself included) can't hear these frequencies at all. Nonetheless, because they're up there in the frequency spectrum, they can encode quite a bit of informational complexity - in fact, the 16kHz to 22.05 kHz band has almost exactly enough bandwidth to encode two telephone conversations. By ditching this band, the MP3 encoder gets rid of a lot of informational complexity that generally can't be heard anyway, leaving more for the actual music.
If you insist that you can hear near-ultrasonics, then simply encode at 160kbps, or use a better encoding format than MP3, such as Vorbis.
Speaking of which, my understanding is that MPEG-4 is absolutely riddled with patent problems. I'm surprised this wasn't mentioned in the article. If you rush to adopt MPEG-4, you've given up the right to whine about big evil corps and their patents - it's you who's adopted patented technology. Support a free video codec instead.
LILO boot: linux init=/usr/bin/emacs
Adobe, I mean... (fingers faster than brain.)
--
Marcelo Vanzin
Marcelo Vanzin
basiccaly, you can get a something like 4.7Gb DVD recompressed in MP4 in 650Mb so you can burn it on a CD, which is great!
--
BeDevId 15453 - Download BeOS R5 Lite free!
"Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
Actually, real headphones (read - didn't come with your $50 discman) have far *better* bass and treble extension than speakers. Lower levels = less breakup. The proximity to the ear makes this possible.
Check out some Grado (SR-60), Sennheiser, or heck, even some nice Denons, and you'll be very surprised. Sony studio sets are decent, too (not the huge ass $10 ones at the Wiz that are the same driver in a plastic milk carton).
You can hear far more with headphones. No room ineraction. Big difference. More clarity.
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
Where can I find info on burning VCDs to play on my DVD player? I'd love to do that!
The only ``intuitive'' interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
LAME, for instance, has a whole bunch of filter options, among which -k probably is the most important for such a test (it turns off all filtering).
IMHO, those tests don't consider _anything_ beyond raw bit rate. Has nobody heard about variable bit rates?
Personally, I can't hear above 16kHz any more, so that's not a problem... :-(
In fact, I routinely encode my MP3s with LAME's VBR at what ends up being roughly 140 bps overall. I haven't found any encoding scheme out there that sounds better (for me).
Another factor might be the different psychoacoustic model used by LAME (which is used to figure out which sound components can be safely thrown away). I'm not qualified to say it's better than the others, but it seems to fit what I _hear_ better.
GoodPint
It plays at 29 fps on a measly P133, not bad...
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
Impressive - thanks for clearing that up for me. :)
GodboltBlog
uuh there is no such thing as mp3 layer 4
there is mpeg-1 layer III aka mp3
-- http://electronicintifada.net --
Do we have a chance, for a change, of having free (as in speech) MP(EG)?4 players at some point, or are we going to learn that the format is covered by n different patents, that it's specs are semi-secret and that sort of things?
Whatever the case, I imagine there will be much pressure to suppress this format if it can fit a whole movie on a single CD-R without too much loss. The film industry is going to be scaaared to death, and we know too well the nasty things it does when it it scaaared to death.
Only 24/96?
The next high-end version of Cubase will support 32-bit audio...Pro Tools as well, I think. I've already seen some softsynths that'll do that as well. Digital signal clipping begone!
----
----
"I used to listen to Null Device before they sold out."
Whats this about MP3 ruining high and low end? At 128kbs the psychoacoustic alogrithms should just remove 'redunant' sounds that people don't hear anyways. Sounds like someone is judging MP3 quality through 1-inch PC speakers.
It's both -- MS's nonstandard MPEG-4 stream inside an AVI container. The actual official MPEG4 file container format is QuickTime, IIRC.
This isn't actually MPEG4, but MS/MPEG4, which is a MPEG2 bloat MS tryed to push when MPEG4 was in call for papers. The MPEG board said "tkx for playing now sod off.". I doubt this thing is even bitstream compatible with real MPEG4.
MPEG4/Audio is similar to MPEG2/Audio AAC.
MPEG4 Has structured audio! This means that eventaully we will be able to have most any content within one file, with a GIGANTIC header. Instrument definitions and loops, so bands can mix music directly into mp4 from the studio, and you can remix it at home (kinda like DVD with the track info, eh?). This will create incredibly small files, but the compatibility would be strange as far as studios using it. e.g. A band fitting a guitar loop through the end of a song, with a predefined volume map... aww yeah!
Maybe eventually we can have a file format with a codec built into it, that could be compiled on a virtual machine.
(midi on my cd player =)
http://siokaos.org/
I wasn't fooled.. the id gave it away. Plus it was pretty unbelievable that taco would get rid of one of the features that makes slashdot what it is.
It was scary how many people fell for it, and even more scary how many said they would go for it. True maybe some were just brownnosing or karma whoring, but still scary.
Boy, that BBC article is riddled with errors. The format is known as MPEG-4, not MP4. If you recall, MP3 is actually MPEG-1 Layer III audio encoding. MPEG-2 is a video and audio encoding format (as used on DVDs). MPEG-3 was never released. MPEG-4 is the successor video and audio compression format to MPEG II, not the successor to MP3.
DivX is not, as reported "the name of a failed technology that tried to create limited-life video cassettes", it was an attempt to create time-limit DVD discs, that's an important distinction.
The MPEG-4 standard is based on the QuickTime file format. It was only formalized in March of 2000, more than six months after the Microsoft "codec" was released. So the Microsoft "MP4" codec is an incomplete implementation of an earlier draft spec of the format and is not compatible with real MPEG-4 bitstreams. See this link for the real scoop on MPEG-4.
Sailing over the event horizon
Until there are cross platform players and encoders I don't see it making each inroads, and there still are some compression issues (but then again, a 128kb/s MP3 wacks out music's treble and bass pretty badly too and that hasn't slowed down its acceptance).
In general people will choose convenience over quality to a certain threshold. The main problem here is that an hours worth of MP4 video (350 megs) is not something many people would want to attempt on a slow net connection - I imagine this would then be most usefull for distribution of small clips, or large clips on CD/DVD.
-
air and light and time and space
A true analog recording still produces a better sound than a sampling digital recording
1) there is no "true analog", you can go down to quantum effects and find aliasing there, but...
There's more information in a digital recording and therefore the quality of recording is higher. Whatever problems you have with a digital recording are due to your preconceptions.
Your preconceptions are wrong too.
One still gets aliasing as you go to the higher frequencies on a digital recording. You don't get that aliasing on analog recordings. The only problem is finding stable analog media, magnetics degrade over time, as well as degrade with every playback, which is the same case with "vinyl" media.
So what about aliasing? The sampling rate is the number of times a second you record a value. For CDs and most computer audio, that is about 44.1kHz. According to Nyquist, you need a sampling rate that is a minimum of double the frequency you want to represent:
_-_-_-
But that means a square wave output. If you record a 11 kHz tone, you will have four samples per cycle:
_ _ _
_- -_- -_- -
Or if not aligned, it could be recorded as something that looks like a square wave!
A good analog recording can still beat consumer digital equipment, but eventually the technology will be beat out with digital equipment that can record up to 192 kHz sampling rates and 24 bits per sample.
If course, any lossy compression makes this a moot point as you loose the "more information" even if it was there in the first place.
So? MP4 would be MPEG Layer 4 compression - also usable for audio compression. (Just like MPEG Layer 3 can also be used for video compression unless I'm mistaken.) So they were just preparing in case a new MP4 format comes out which allows better compression and quality. The people making the MPEG format will continue improving it and adding new layers.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Actually, it's MPEG-1, Audio Layer 3, but I imagine you knew that..
Erm.. just being nitpicky but, if no one makes a binary for linux, and the source does not exist, how do you get it to run on a linux box without Vmware?
I think that was the point...
"If you sit back a bit from the monitor there isn't really anything noticably bad with it. If you sit a bit closer though (as close as I usually sit from my monitor) you can pick out the compression artifacts. "
Even better is to use a video card with tv out. On a television set (from a few feet away) the artifacts are virtually un noticable. Looks much like VHS.
First digit is five
Second digit is seven
Third digit is five
numb
So where are these so called websites that contain Mpeg-4 software and/or vidoes?
How can the treble and bass go down when the music is compressed? I thought it just removed unheard sounds in the song, or is the treble and bass "unheard"?
http://www.macdivx.com
there is no reason why the DeCSS case should be affected by mpeg 4. What cracking the compression does is it gives access to the actual file or files on the DVD. If those are passed around then it is absolutly flawless copying. On the other hand, if you think about it, if you can see it you can copy it. On the lowest end is video taping your TV screen with a video camera (of course this wouldn't be the best way to go about it). But if mpeg 4 is going to be used for copying movies then DeCSS really won't have any effect on that. mpeg 2 even on DVD is still a very lossy compression, and if you are using that as the base for copying then you are still recompressing the video which is just as bad (as in quality) and sometimes worse than copying it to an anolog format. But when something like DeCSS gives access to the original then it can be passed around without fault because there is no recompression involved. And by the way, don't think that I don't hate the MPAA too.
This Wiki Feeds You TV and Anime - vidwiki.org
Those tools are already pretty much out there. Most still require one or two manual steps in the process, but it's still not a terribly complex thing to do.
I don't have any links handy, but it shouldn't take more than a few minutes on altavista or google to get yourself pointed in the right direction.
I'm right now hacking a new set into my 1976 Dodge Ram. It's a little retro, I guess, but it's cool putting new Chysler parts into an old Chrysler truck. Even if Infinity isn't owned by Chrysler, it still has a little Pentastar.
Other good car sound systems: GM's Delco-Bose system, as used in early 1990s Cadillacs. And GM also put a kick-ass little system into every 1984 to 1986 Pontiac Fiero: the speakers were in the headrests. (In '87-'88 Fieros, they were in the pillars.) The Fiero sound system was actually very faithful in reproduction, but if you're the sort of person who thinks that good music is all about lots of bass, they're really not for you. These things produced almost concert-hall stereo imaging and had great, clean, full-range response.
As for home use, I'm some kind of purist. I've got a beautiful set of vintage 1970s Acoustic Research AR-4x speakers hooked up to a nice Sound A-5000 amplifier. It seems like such a travesty to have them hooked up to a $50 sound card for playing MP3s.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
As all of the MPEG formats offer a sliding scale of compression, you should be able to make a video as compact as you like - at the espense of quality.
What is the minimum size per minute of footage for decent visual quality video, for MP4 and for its predecessor?
please correct/update this where I am wrong.
Mp3 = file extension and popular name given to audio encoded with MPEG1 layer 3.
MPEG1=Standard for compressing Video and Audio
MPEG2=Standard for compressing Video and Audio
MPEG4 version1=Standard for compressing Video and Audio
MPEG4 version2=Enhanced version of MPEG4, backwards compatible with MPEG4 version1
Microsoft MPEG4=Typical Microsoft (incompatible) implementation of open standard. Hacked together from unfinished draft of MPEG4 (version 1?)
DivX(consumer product)=Defunct comsumer Digital Video format (like DVD, except no one bought it)
Div-X(codec)=Hacked version of Microsoft's hacked version of MPEG4
"MP4" (as used in this article)=Div-X codec (see above)
Hope this is usefull (and accurate)
I'm repeatedly amazed at how these non-funny, non-witty, non-poetic haiku get immediately moderated through the ceiling by some remedial-English moderator who thinks that since an otherwise dumb comment is in haiku form, it must be funny.
--
Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
how many hours of what quality video can it convert to 350MB?
Although this use is not legal, it shows that Mpeg-4 is here and should quickly replace the current defacto standard.
How is it not legal? Is there some issue with using the MPEG-4 codec for compression that is illegal?
The illegal part is compressing video you don't have the rights to and re-distributing it. Unless you work for the MPAA, then thinking about doing it is illegal.
What ever happened to MP3 layer 4? I'm assuming that the MP4 works on the same principle: removing the worst (to an extent, measured/based on kbps) frequencies that could be reattained through human interpolation, a kickin stereo, or your mp3 software. It is nice, however, to see an MPEG audio layer with an optional video portion.
http://siokaos.org/
Remind me again, please...
Windows has a monopoly on the desktop, and Linux users can always use WINE or VMWARE if they really need a closed-source codec. Mac users, I'm not so sure about.
The point is, Mr. Malda, that even if _your_ household is devoid of Win32 (and I doubt that), a Win32-only version of any piece of software is enough for it to "make significant inroads"
That's just the reality of a world where a single desktop OS has an overwhelming lock on the user community.
One of the Mpeg-4 hacks is called Div-X.
. html
It's widely used in the pirate scene, and apparently works very VERY well for compressing 2 hours of video/audio into about 650 MB worth (1 cd). The only issue is in order to play these types of files you need a fast CPU, about P2/300.
Although this use is not legal, it shows that Mpeg-4 is here and should quickly replace the current defacto standard.
http://www.digital-digest.com/dvd/support/mpeg4
Above is one site , explaining lots about MPEG-4 including the various formats MPEG-4 can be applied to (avi, divx, etc), as well as platform-related information.
Another Div-x related site at:
http://www.mydivx.com/
It seems this page is requesting help to make a Linux div-x port, but there seems to be little and/or no substance.
http://linux.divx.st
Here's a link to an Open-source Div-x contest, albeit for the Mac, but it's here:
http://www.flashingyellow.com/contest.html
350 is not that big. I've done Linux installs off of ftp.cdrom.com that came in at over 700 in about 3 to 4 hours not really that long when you consider that before DSL I would spend 7 hours to get a 60 meg demo.
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
Not hardly. I've had a DivX copy of Total Recall, among other movies, sitting on my hard drive for about 3 months and been playing them with Media Player for that long. I'm surprised it took the mainstream media this long to pick up on it.
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
http://www.flashingyellow.com/contest.html
Here's one for the Mac. I already posted this somewhere around Comment #47 of the origional article.
There is even source code available at this site.. I don't know how far they are though. Evaluate it at your own risk =)
Why are slashdot posting 'DivX is the new mp3' stories masquerading as mpeg4 news? For those who don't know, DivX is simply a hacked version of Microsoft's preliminary version of the mpeg4 video codec, which removes some restrictions inherent in MS's implementation. It enables compression of a DVD movie onto a CD using DeCSS and mp3 for audio. The quality is good, not as good as DVD but better than VHS and pretty watchable.
A lot of websites seem to be infering that people will distribute these films over the internet ala mp3. This seems unlikely, as not many people have the time or bandwidth do download CD images. What is more likely is that people will rent DVD's from Blockbusters & rip the film to DivX.
Where are the specs on the MP4 format? By encoding, do they mean from MPEG2 -> MP4? The "hacked" codec from M$, does anyone have it out there (source?)??
"MP4" is really called MPEG-4 Version 2. The full spec. can be found here.
MPEG-4 defines how to compress and decompress raw video into the MPEG-4 bitstream format. "Encoding" refers to the compress half of this process. If you are converting from one compression form (e.g. MPEG-2) to another (e.g. MPEG-4) you are "transcoding".
The Microsoft codec, whether hacked or not, is based on an early draft of the MPEG-4 format and is incompatible with real MPEG-4 bitstreams.
Sailing over the event horizon
And I think that this will affect DeCSS minimally, because unfortunately, the corporatist (not capitalist, hasn't been capitalist for a while) government that exists here in Amerika will bend over backwards anyway to satisfy their "intrests", in other words, the people who receive their kickbacks.
Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses
Posted to /. maybe, from a british Hi-Fi magazine.
Double blinded and all that. The so-called hi-fi buffs actually thought MP3's sounded better than the original sources.
But, of course, they would often say that about two identical pieces, ie, they thought one sounded better.
He reads his critiques
And responds with an haiku
Japanese Kibo?
--
It's still confusing. Perhaps the codec group could rename as Divex or something...
Don't forget the abortive copy-protected MP4 music format that some rap group tried releasing their music in a year or so ago. It didn't stand for anything at the time--they just meant it to be MP3 incremented by 1.
--
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
Ouch. It would be nice to have somethign more universal.. perhaps when DVD-recorders become commonplace, people all have next-generation DVD readers that can read such disks, and of course we have the hardware to create 5+ gigs worth of quality mpeg video =)
Your project definately has it's uses.. and will likely be valuable for as long as DVD players w/vcd and cd-recordable ability exist.
Good luck!
A great summer project for college student:
Write an open source MPEG4 player/encoder.
Thanks in advance!
So you've got MPEG1 layer 3 for music. MPEG1 being the first iteration of the MPEG attempts at digitally encoding and compressing movies... But why can't we use MPEG4 layer 3? If the compression for an MPEG4 movie is several times better than the compression for an MPEG1 movie, than wouldn't the same apply for the layer 3 audio? Or do I just totally misunderstand?
From www.r3mix.net: This is something to always keep in mind, and most users that still use 128kbit/s forget that one day they might want to listen to their music on something else than their $10 pc speakers or their walkman.
However, let's take a peek at some C'T tests using $10,000 headphones and a $15,000 audio station, total cost of $25,000 and at the time the highest quality system possible to assemble.
A constant bit rate (CBR) encoder at 128Kbps (immaterial of the encoder) will leave audible differences on high end equipment, as 90% of the samples were picked out by the 300 testers.
A CBR of 256kbps encoded by Lame or some of the Fraunhauffer encoders was never picked out.
LAME, running in 128-kbps Variable Bit Rate (VBR) mode (and using -V 1), gave indestinguishable from CD tests in a less formal test. Since 256-kbps CBR is CD-perfect for frequency loss, nothing will exceed that, and running in -V 0 is going to cost you quite a bit of space as it jumps up to 220-kbps or more at times.
--
Ben Kosse
Remember Ed Curry!
Refreshing and sweet
Your haiku soothes my mind like
Sherbet in summer
If you can go to bed, knowing you did a valuable thing today, you're very lucky. If you can't... it's not bedtime
There's also nAVI which is another hacked Microsoft codec that's used exclusively by the group ShadowRealm (SmR)
If I'm not mistaken, Microsoft's ASF format has been using MPEG4 for a while now.
That's been my understanding also. ASF's have been around since before DeCSS (and have been being used to distribute pirated movies for quite some time.) Considering the overall quality of the format it seems ridiculous to use something like DeCSS to pirate stuff--it would be a lot of extra effort that would gain you nothing in the way of quality. To sum it up--this method of DVD piracy has been available to Windows users for at least a year now.
Anyway, here's an ASF a guy I know made. It's basically a short interview one of the local stations did regarding his new electric car. (Yeah, I got to drive the thing--pretty neat.)
http://drive.to/mysparrow -- Click "Movies"
numb
As somebody else has already said, it is quite a bit better than LP videotape. However, I don't think that it is up to snuff to SP videotape. If you sit back a bit from the monitor there isn't really anything noticably bad with it. If you sit a bit closer though (as close as I usually sit from my monitor) you can pick out the compression artifacts. Some of them get pretty bad in action intensive sequences. However, the framerate holds up just fine regardless.
So far as compression ratio, I don't know exactly, but what I was watching was the Matrix ripped from the DVD onto a single CD-R. There was enough spare room on the CD-R to hold the CD-soundtrack as well, and a small bit of other stuff. I guess that would mean that "Saving Private Ryan" in under 350 Mb would look pretty bad compared to the original. Of course, I'm a little picky about a lack of compression artifacts (they jump out at me). So if I was a movie industry exec, I wouldn't get too worried about massive copying of movies using Div-X (although, I suppose if I was an industry exec, I'd be worried about 9th generation copies of somebody taking a camcorder into the theatre with them, so...)
In any case, the problem isn't going to be transmitting these over the internet (350 meg is a lot to transfer to see a crappy copy of a movie). The big problem is going to be on college campuses, where a profusion of burners and 100mB/sec ethernet makes swapping a couple of gigabytes of files fairly trivial. The copy of the Matrix I saw was legal (space shifting by the owner), but I know that a lot of other movies are available on campus ethernet. I know that at least the Matrix, American Pie, The Phantom Menace, and South Park were all available near the beginning of the semester last year. I have no clue how much stuff will be up next year, but I don't think most people will be heading out to blockbuster to get their favorite movies...
Whilst many people think that the BBC is the bastion of fair and balanced reporting, these days thats becoming less and less the case. Its happening especially so in tech news where they appear to try to simplify subjects to the point that they become factually incorrect in many places, I point to this article as an example. On the TV news the BBC appears to be putting more and more spin on the news that it reports. A good example of this is the whole Spencergate fiasco (that girl who got refused for Oxford). They continually use the phrase 'class war', and even though they have given people from Oxford a chance to have their say, they always manage to put a pro-lab/anti-ox spin on the whole affair.
Thats just one issue that has bugged me about the BBC as of late. When some new big story comes along im sure they'll spin it in a distasteful (to me, at least) fashion. Its nowhere near as bad as american news, but I feel as though the BBC should be completly impartial in all matters, something which it hasnt been doing as of late.
I wonder if its possible for me to get even more offtopic in this post? I dont think I'll bother. I think I'll find something to cure the brainfreeze from a McFlurry followed by a milkshake instead....
Nick
Nick
Yeah, and a lot of other people are going to get sued as well. mp1.com through mp25.com are all taken up. mp26.com is available, at least when I checked just now. It may be gone already.
:)
Why doesn't the MPEGroup just rename the damn standard to something else
Sreeram.
----------------------------------
Observation is the essence of art.
Yes, you could put a standard-length DVD onto one CD.
dot-multimedia-dot-
mp4-dot-sex
[pink beam of light]
Yay! I can't wait to download 1984 off Gnutella as a form of protest!
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
If I'm not mistaken, Microsoft's ASF format has been using MPEG4 for a while now.
With ASF, you can easily fit a movie onto a CD. This works great with really BRIGHT footage, but for dark titles, like The Matrix and the 6th Sense, it pretty much sucks the nut. The darks all blend together, and become quite.. uh.. MPEGgy. Weird artifactish type things start showing up, and the video gets pretty chunky.
It's like losing low tones on music. The darks become all chunky, vague, and distorted.
Then again, what do you expect, for a movie that fits on a CD?
So just for sampling purposes only because getting them to keep would be a bad thing does anyone know where to get some samples of MP4 video?
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
You're correct, but so is the person you replied to. MPEG-# refers to the encoding group (ie. MPEG-2, which contains AAC and VQF; MPEG-1, which has the famous mp2's and mp3's), MPEG # refers to the encoding bit rates and sample rates. The layers 1, 2, or 3 refer to the codecs within the MPEG-#.
I was at a friend's dorm at Ohio State and watched as DivX of his (Trainspotting), and i must say that it was amazing! The movie wasn't short, it was awesome quality (you don't even know you're wathcing it on a computer after a minute), sound was good enough for me not to notice, and was like 450megs! Movie was cool too, pretty crazy.
Mike Roberto (roberto@soul.apk.net) -GAIM: MicroBerto
Berto
Also, the statement "no sources, so not for linux" is incorrect - just because you have source doesn't mean it's for linux.
You've got it backwards. You should be saying "just because it's for linux, doesn't mean you have source." The negation of "A implies B" is "not-B doesn't imply not-A".
In more familiar terms, the original poster said "no white feathers, so not a duck." You responded "Just because you have white feathers doesn't mean you're a duck." The logical negation would be "Not all ducks have white feathers."
I think.
-- Old Man Kensey
This is a good thing for the linux community (and every other system as well), right? After all, if there is source, then it can be made to work for linux fairly easily, correct? I hope so at least!
Mike Roberto (roberto@soul.apk.net) -GAIM: MicroBerto
Berto
Your Haiku's: not funny
Waste of moderator points
Negative one, they should be
Geez... DivX has been around for ages!! And it was created from the SOURCE CODE of Microsoft's own MPEG-4 encoder. These two "formats" are interchangable; one is a hack that has seen improvements, the other is Microsoft's own "branch" of the original codec.
As for playability, I can compress an entire 2 hour DVD into around 600MB with a 96kbps MP3 soundtrack, maintaining original letterbox (720x288) resolution.
While CommanderTaco's been sleeping, several companies have already announced set-top players for MPEG-4, and there's even a version of the codec (and player) available for the Mac.
OLD NEWS!
Part of EFF's strategy was to prove to the judge that no piracy using DeCSS was occuring. The rise of "DivX" and sites explaining in gory detail how to pirate DVDs with it and DeCSS completely derails that.
Just think, we're going to lose all "fair use" rights in the US so some warez kiddiez can avoid paying $7 for a movie (or $17 for the DVD). Gives ya a warm fuzzy feeling, no?
I WAS referring to the fact it's widely used in the pirate scene.
I haven't heard/seen any legitimate uses of div-x yet..
I wasn't referring to Div-X in general (or mpeg4) as being illegal.
lets see, that was what, like 6-7-6. whatever
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Well, from what I know, Div-x isn't really mpeg video, it's in avi format.
-motardo
There was once a man with saltpeter... #8==+ 0:$
MSK
--
... or "double" quality.
But that's just rumours then.
Pretty much every movie in recent memory has been available this way. The files aren't ridiculously large either, on the same order as the ones talked about in the article.
No, no, no....
.asf. It's my understanding, though I could be wrong, that it's just a patch to the MS binaries, so no source code available.
.asf files.)
There is no relationship between DIVX, the lame pay-per-view DVD scheme, and DivX, the video codec.
DivX, the codec, is simply a version of Microsoft's MPEG4 codec which has been hacked to allow it to be used for file types other than
(btw, look about half-way down this page to see what Microsoft has to say about other folks writing software that reads
News at 11: Metallica sues the BBC for passing along information about applications that compress videos, allowing the masses to trade pirate copies of Metallica videos previously available only on DVD. Quoth spokesdude Lars, "Well, like, yeah, they could actually be porn films with the names of Metallica videos on them. But admitting that would make us, like, look like idiots. And, um, and justice for all and stuff."
I do not have a signature
I assume it would take a VERY long time to encode however...its takes a few minutes for just a few minutes of audio, let alone a two hour movie.
This isn't really true. DivX quality is far better than VHS. The compression is only noticeable when there is a lot of movement on screen, and colour banding in backgrounds. The definition of the edges & the contrast are much better than VHS.
First, you didn't say which encoder you're using. There is a tremendous amount of difference, and the most popular coders seem to be among the lowest quality.
Any MP3 coder is going to give you muddy hi-hats at 128kbps. That's because the hi-hat sound is incredibly complex. Getting all the nuances and subtleties perfect requires a lot of bits. At 128kpbs, the encoder does what it can, but can't possibly get it all in there. That's why they sound muddy.
There is no reason for a good MP3 coder to significantly distort bass sounds. If it's changing a smoothly varying timbre into one that's "flittery," then you're seeing variation from frame to frame, a significant problem with all MP3 coders other than Fraunhofer's newer ones. If you're getting this effect with Fraun, I'd be very surprised.
The 16KHz cutoff is frequency-based (not exactly an FFT, but similar). Look at some spectrum analysis data - you'll see it's pretty crisp.
MP3 at 128kbps definitely does distort the sound. That rate is just at the knee - a lot of people can't hear the difference of going to a higher rate, while just about everybody starts hearing the degradation at lower bitrates.
But my original point was not that MP3 is flawless, it was that the loss is in sonic complexity rather than frequency response. Because the degradation caused by traditional analog processes such as mic's, tapes, speakers, etc., can all be well quantified in terms of loss of frequency response, it's tempting to use the same criteria to judge digital compression. However tempting, though, it's wrong.
LILO boot: linux init=/usr/bin/emacs
The Idea is that divx can get almost any movie under 2 hours on one cd; this is it's main "selling-point". I've seen the matrix in a 600 meg file with near-dvd (just like mp3 is near-cd) quality. Most people rip them to make them fit...so if it comes out to be a bit big..they can just re-encode it a bit smaller.
How many MSexclusive patents are introduced into the embraced and extended mpeg-4 stepchildren?
Why is MS releasing a codec that they claim to be mpeg4 before the mpeg group completly defines mpeg4?
Will non MS mpeg4 players be able to play mp42, mp43, mpg4 codecs?
when the mpeg4 spec is finalized will ms continue to distrubte the mp42,mp43, mpg4 codecs?
and yes when a monopoly bundles something (ie bundling wmp with the os and with ie) then it is being a bad monopoly.
next time try not to be such a troll ;^)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I think you'll see the crispness of the 16kHz cutoff in these graphs.
LILO boot: linux init=/usr/bin/emacs
You can go to any computer fair here in the UK and find loads of pirated VCD's on sale, these usually come on 2 cd's. If this MP4 quality is any good, the ripping a DVD compressing it using MP4 would easily get a 90 minute movie onto one cd.
-- A kick in the pants is worth 8 to the head.
Just because there is an encoding program, called "Divx ;)", it doesn't mean the standard is called Divx ;). AVI comes with various compression schemes, since M$ ever began to use it with Windows 3.0. Mpeg4 is just a compression scheme or codec, so the AVI extention is correct, if you consider Windows...
OK, first, there's really no such thing as MP4. This article is the very first time I've seen that term used. What they are really talking about is MPEG-4. Or, more specifically, Microsoft's implementation of MPEG-4. Or, more specifically yet, a hacked version of Microsoft's implementation of MPEG-4. This hacked version is being called DivX, and is basically Microsoft's implementation with a binary patch that removes some restrictions (like only being able to use the codec to encode .asf files)
.asf file, then you're pretty much stuck with Windows Media Player, unless you can still find a copy of VirtualDub 1.3c (see this page to see why you need an old version)
.avi player will suffice, provided you have the codec on your system.
As far as players go, if you're playing an
If you're playing a file encoded with the DivX codec, then pretty much any
Remember, MPEG-4 is a codec, not a file format.
The playstation is known as the PSX because that was what it was originally going to be called. Its name was changed to the playstation more than a year after it was originally announced. I would agree that three letter/number abbreviations are fairly standard though. Hell, in Diablo II that's the requirement for guild names. If Blizzard's enforcing it, it's gotta be good. ^^ Hopefully it will just stay as mpg. Honestly though I wasn't aware that this was new; I believe this codec has been available for some time. I could be wrong though.
It's not even really MPEG-4; it's video compression based on MPEG-4, using avi or asf as the file format.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the encoder used can make as large a difference as the compression format itself. I've got about 5 different MPEG-1 encoders on my machine, and most output the worst looking garbage you could imagine. The Xing encoder does OK. However, the Panasonic MPEG encoder produces absolutely outstanding output. Well worth the $80 price.
IIRC the PlayStation was basically an SNES with a CD drive that Sony and Nintendo developed together. But Nintendo never used it and Sony got tired of getting jerked around. They built a better standalone unit.
Since it wouldn't be the original PlayStation (even though that was never sold) it needed a different name. Just as 'extortion' sounds better because of the 'x', the new one was the PlayStation X. Then they dropped the X from the name, but not the acronym.
The PS2 should have been the PS3 or the PSY of course, but what the hell.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
I just finished watching a MPEG4 (Divx) rip of South Park BLU. I am stunned by the quality. It's not DVD, but most scenes were VHS quality. The entire file was 431 megs. The picture quality is way better than real-video files.
I can't stop thinking : Oh my god, the MPAA is going to freak out over this.
Now, is it possible to make a VCD using a regular CD-R, or is some special hardware needed?
As a Haiku is meant to be a "distilled/crystallised moment in time", I can understand that the first one (South Park) got moderated up - it's good. But the alt.binaries one, although funny (in the "fitting it into the syllables" sense), is definitely not a haiku.
- Oliver
"exp(i*Pi)+1=0" - Euler
- Oliver
The right to bear arms is only slightly less stupid than the right to arm bears...
Remember that a VHS video recorder also significantly reduces picture quality. Yet I'd bet that 90% of the public not only is not bothered by it, they are not even aware of it.
Guess that's why those DVD player thingys have been such a huge flop in the market.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
My problem with DVD watching is that I tend to notice the digital artifacting (jaggies, areas of unchanging pixels appear to be sharply unmoving versus more animated areas with slight movement). The analog artifacting of VHS is less noticeable to me, but I'm a video codec nut.
They skipped it because it would have been confusing.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
DivX is a new piece of software that was hacked from Microsoft's MPEG-4 Codec to make the bitstream even smaller.
.asf. To the best of my knowledge (and I've looked into it a bit) the hack had nothing to do with the size of the bitstream.
Actually, it was hacked to unlock the codec and allow encoding to file types other than
Although 350MB is still ridiculously large, this will lend credence to the claims that DeCSS is aiding piracy.
A good counter-argument to this is simple.
When you encode video at such a low ratio, you lose a LOT of quality. I seriously doubt that I could tell the difference between VHS and DVD when encoded in this format.
People trade movies that were recoded with 8MM Video, on a tripod in an empty theatre for that matter. If you want the quality you buy the DVD.
Same as music. In my car, with the factory sound system (Chrysler makes some sweet Inifinity speakers), I can DEFINATELY tell the difference between tracks I've burned, from compressed and uncompressed audio. If you want the quality, you buy the CD.
you can use DeCSS to copy a DVD on your HD, then use some coder and DivX ti transform the DVD file into an MP4 one, check DivX site, and take also FlaskMpeg, and VirtualDUB
--
BeDevId 15453 - Download BeOS R5 Lite free!
"Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
Remember that a VHS video recorder also significantly reduces picture quality. Yet I'd bet that 90% of the public not only is not bothered by it, they are not even aware of it.
I think this is a great point. Its amazing how many people have put up with the often stunningly low quality of many consumer VHS machines. What is interesting is how DVD has started to take off. A number of my (geek and non-geek) friends have got DVD and boy, they do notice the lack of quality in VHS after that.
I suspect as more folks get exposed to high quality video sources (DVD, Net, Digital cable done right etc.) their tolerance for poor quality VHS will drop.
Sailing over the event horizon
DivX is the name of the codec based on Microsoft's implementation of MP4. It's not the player.
Also, the statement "no sources, so not for linux" is incorrect - just because you have source doesn't mean it's for linux.
The links are correct though...
You should never take life too seriously - You'll never get out of it alive.
DVD contents are ALREADY compressed. How much more can 'mp4' actually compress it without destroying it? This IS comming at a bad time since now there IS some argument to the claim that DeCSS could be used for piracy. While 350mb is still a little too large for downloads (though many are downloading .iso images of Redhat 6.2, etc) it can be done overnight on an ISDN or 56K modem link. Also with CDR blanks now less than $0.50 a pop and burners under $200 there is yet another way to distribute pirated movies. The only hope for the people who cracked the DeCss is to overturn the DMCRA and claim fair use.
Yes, you could put a movie onto a single CD with this codec. You would be restricted, however, to playing the movie on a Windows PC.
More convenient would be to transcode to MPEG-1 and burn it onto a Video-CD, which would also allow you to play back on a standard DVD player, as well as a wider variety of operating systems.
The only downside is that with MPEG-1, you'll need two discs to hold a standard length movie.
Another interesting aspect is the fact that no one really sees 350 megs as downloadable. You damn straight its downloadable. Its not as if you're going to have to download the entire movie in one chunk. Warezed video games have been divided into 'disks' for ages now. You get the first hour in 35 10MB disks. Then you get the second hour in X disks. (in theory) you could increase the resolution and quality and break the movie up further, depending on what kind of experience you want to get. We're a long way from downloading Lord of the Rings the same day its realeased in theatres (whenever that will be), but the with the speed that DSL, Cable and ISDN have swept across the country, we're not that far away either.
It think you're looking at the best part of a day...
"Woah... I know algorithms
This didn't happen on the web, but when I lived in Bahrain (small island state next to Saudi Arabia) a few years ago we usually got to rent movies either a month before it hit the theatres or right after.
Ok I have watched a James Bond - The World is Not Enough movie. It was on SINGLE CD - 640Mb. The quality was more than what I expected - good, watchable, comparable to video tape.
The player was only for Windows (and there is one for Mac I believe. I _think_ there is no player for Linux / UNIX. (_please_ email me if there is one) David Theactual James Bond film was so shit (first time I saw it) I could not believe it - I mean shit compared to other James Bond movies, otherwise it was good action movie.I like the sentence: "... will take hours to download over all but the fastest net connections. ..." hehehe. My fastest ISO image I downloaded was about 40 minutes. That went over some backbone, but the local uni network goes even faster.
nosig today
The company 'Infinity' makes those speakers. I've got a full set of Infinity speakers for my surround sound setup at home and in my car (replaced my factory speakers with them).
:)
Yes, they are awesome speakers.
-Zane
This sig is worse than my last.
While MP3 probably shouldn't have been named such, let's not exacerbate the mistake by making another one.
I'm guessing that MP3 probably gained its name not so much because the standard was MPEG-I, layer 3 (or something like that) but because that's just the file extension. Even with FAT32 and NTFS supporting long filenames (knock on wood) Microsoft still pushes for 8.3 filenames, or 3-character extensions to say the least. To top it off, people like having easy-to-pronounce and -remember three-character abbreviations. (Why was the PlayStation abbreviated to PSX, instead of just PS?)
So you can keep calling it MPEG-4, but to most people it'll be MP4. And for some reason it'll show up in the Windows property sheet as "Windows Media File."
For more information, click here.
yeah, nice post Bruce. since you've been bitchslapped there's time for some fun eh?
this bitchslapping thing is going to turn lots of regular accounts into trollers out of solidarity
by the way, when that happens, will someone tell me about how to set comments threshold below -1
I read something about that in the moderation sid two or three weeks ago - then the comment disappeared
So how long until movies are released on the web before they hit theatres? And how long until the first trial?
---
How long have you been listening to the world's famous?
'Bout six weeks.
Six weeks!
It is the name of the freeware mp4 player (no sources, so not for linux). Get it here:
/.'d as fast ;)
http://divx.forpresident.nl/
http://divx.ctw.cc/
I didn't make them links, so they wouldn't get
Have fun. -toppk
Look out this will be the next target of the MPAA...... Run for the hills everyone!
What viewers or players are out already to view this new format? I haven't heard-of or seen anything that implements MP4. (Geez, I didn't even think it was even close to being released yet!)
Karma: NaN
Well, well. Maybe now they will start letting some independent directors make movies the length they actually wanted them to be? Will this break the stupid fast food mentality of film producers? That is, make movies too long to be easily pirated? Just a thought.
Stay tuned, could get interesting.
--
You're on the right track, but you're wrong. The concept you're thinking of is the "contrapositive". Given a statement "A implies B", there are three related statements, the inverse ("Not A implies Not B"), the converse ("B implies A"), and the contrapositive ("Not B implies Not A").
The statement "A implies B" is a true statement when A is false, or when A is true and B is also true. It's a false statement when A is true but B is false -- namely, A did not actually imply B. This is best illustrated with a truth table:
ABA->B
--------------
FFT
FTT
TFF
TTT
The contrapositive of the original statement is always true when the original statement is true, and is always false when the original statement is false. In other words, a statement and its contrapositive are logically equivalent statements. So, when a given statement is true, you can state with conviction that its contrapositive is true. Likewise, when a given statement is false, you can state with conviction that its contrapositive is also false. The two are equivalent statements.
Consider the truth table for the contrapositive, as compared to the original statement:
ABA->B !B!A!B->!A
-----------------------------
FFT TT T
FTT FT T
TFF TF F
TTT FF T
For example, take the statement "If it's raining, the sidewalk must be wet." Here, A is "If it's raining", and B is "the sidewalk must be wet." If we accept this as a true statement, then we can say confidently "If the sidewalk is not wet, then it must not be raining." We cannot say, however, "If it's not raining, the sidewalk is not wet", or "If the sidewalk is wet, it's raining" -- at least, not on the basis of the original statement alone.
In your example, you stated "No white feathers, so not a duck." A == "No white feathers," and B == "not a duck". The contrapositive would be "If it's a duck, it has white feathers." In other words, "All ducks have white feathers" is an equivalent statement to the initial statement "No white feathers, so not a duck."
Got that?
--Joe--
Program Intellivision!
Where are the specs on the MP4 format? By encoding, do they mean from MPEG2 -> MP4? The "hacked" codec from M$, does anyone have it out there (source?)??
M. R.
Hopefully, when MPEG-4's audio specification catches on in audiophile circles
;-) ripping. The MPEG-4's audio is simply MP3, plain and simple. In fact, you can actually choose to do any kind of audio encoding you desire, its simply that MP3 is the most commonly used audio format in DivX ;-).
;-) codec contains a SMILEY FACE! Its not the DivX codec. Its the DivX ;-) codec.
So obviously you haven't done any DivX
MP4 would be redundant and stupid to say the least.
And please note that the DivX
--
"A mind is a horrible thing to waste. But a mime...
It feels wonderful wasting those fsckers."
I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
To add a little perspective.
At 35 hours download time per movie over your average modem I don't think it'll take off for a few years yet.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
Have you seen what DivX rips look like on a slow machine? Do you know what the difference is between the processor required to play DVD discs and DivX encoded movies is?
;-) to DivX for my post. I'm Lazy. Its a terminal condition.
Sorry, but I'm not going to pay >$1000 US to have a DivX player when I'd really rather watch DVD to begin with. DivX is okay for a pirate format (it looks leaps and bounds better than VCD), but for a serious format its not so good. Plus the fact that it takes a rather large processor to handle the decoding.. This means that any kind of DivX player would require at least a fast Duron or Celeron to play Divx, which would be totally wasted for playing DVDs.
I think Sony and other DVD manufacturers are well aware of these facts, and I don't expect to see too many DivX players out. (MP3 has been out for well over two years, and only 1! manufacturer FINALLY has out some kind of CD-Mp3 car stereo.)
Perhaps when processors drop to the insanely cheap prices we'll see some DivX players.
Note to masochists: I shortened DivX
--
"A mind is a horrible thing to waste. But a mime...
It feels wonderful wasting those fsckers."
I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
Best regards,
Daniel.
--
Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
This works out to 6M/minute, or 100K/sec.
is this 640x480x24bit @ 30fps?
How much of a compression difference is it over MPEG-2?
You make a good point about how the encoder makes a big difference. Everything I've ever encoded has either been with Fraunhoffer (sp?) or lame, and I can't tell the difference between the real thing and the copy at 128 (I even bothered doing a blind randomized test to see if I could). On the other hand, some stuff my brother encoded with MediaJukebox (I think) sounded terrible, even at 160.
Anybody who has trouble with 128s should just use a better encoder. Go out and buy Fraunhoffer, or download lame. Unless of course you're one of those horrible people causing trouble for the rest of us by stealing all of your music. In which case you deserve all the compression artifacts one can stuff into 128k.
From the article, it would appear the Microsoft has the lid on on the codec through their Media Player. Anyone know of people working on an open source version of this codec?
And how will this affect the DeCSS trial? Now the lawyers can prove that pirating is possible thanks to DeCSS putting the file on the hard drive, then compressing it. Comments? It shouldn't hurt that much (since the old "copying a video tape is fair use because the quality isn't as good" arguement would tie in here, but I'm not so sure.)
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
On a more technical note, assuming you decrypted a DVD and re-encoded it with the new format, how much shrinkage would occur? Could you burn a DVD onto a CD? Or, more possibly, onto several CDs?
Now that I think about it, this could aid the fight against the MPAA. What if I want to buy a DVD, but don't have a player? Could I get a friend to copy my brand-new, legal DVD onto several CDs for me, so I could watch them at home? Copying for portability or backups is legal, remember...
TO BUY A NEW CAR WOULD MAKE YOU SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE.
"I never intended to say that div-x or Mpeg4 was not legal, in any way shape or form."
The idea is of course not illegal.
However the common Windows Divx codec is a hacked version of Microsoft code, which most likely violates MS' licence agreement, and is illegal.
When I hear the word 'innovation', I reach for my pistol.
DivX has been around in volume for more then a few months now. I have access to a little over 20 movies encoded in divx as I write this.
jason
It certainly isn't the first time that microsoft realeases an unfinished product.
What does it look like? I can already encode "Saving Private Ryan" in under 350mb - the technique is called low framerates and low pixel resolution. How watchable is it? Does it slideshow in action intensive sequences? What's the average compression ratio?
Any of you slashgeeks want to fill in the details?
--Shoeboy
(former microserf)
I disagree. This guy not only is writing some occasional gems, but his haiku responses to his criticism are effing brilliant.
Also his restraint in still posting at 1, even though my calculations show he's got to be past 20 karma by now. (Unless he's been a dick in moderating.)
--
The author is a victim of M$ FUDding the issues. This is not MPEG-4, as has been pointed out already. What hasn't been pointed out is Microsoft "leaked" this codec to the Moviez and Pr0n kiddiez to establish momentum, as Microsoft's incomplete and Windows-biased implementation of MPEG-4 was rejected by the standards committee. Not only were current MS video implementations inferior to Apple QuickTime (even on Win32), but QT is *the* standard in professional video editing (even on Win32).
;)
Why leak an obsolete codec? Because it, and the FREE MS compression tools (what the FTC sometimes calls product dumping by a monopoly) have conditioned the video pirates into using this format for trading.
Heh... wait till they try switching their OS over to Linux, won't they feel stupid. Oh wait, never mind. Where's the |33t sense of danger in using an OS that can never be pirated?
that's probably why he's such a prick about it ..
http://mrhide.pinnesota.org
One question I have is of the "--cwlimit" option, "compute tonality up to freq (in kHz) default 8.8717" --- what is tonality? what difference do different tonality values make?
And ultimately the -k switch "keep ALL frequencies (disables all filters)" looks great. LAME has presets for various types of media; I like that.
I'm talking about LAME 3.70 by the way...
the real at&t mix
Actually you can't watch it while downloading if the MPEG-4 format they are talking about is DivX ;-), its not a streamable format. This is another reason people on modems and such won't like it, as if you get an incomplete d/l you can't watch it.
The quality of DivX is very good for how small the files are, but no trying to watch it on a slow computer, as its very processor intensive to decode, my 450mhz machine usually can only keep up around 25-28 fps while viewing 30fps avi's @ 640x480.
The nice thing about MPEG-4 is you can have variable bandwidth, so your high motion scenes can take up more space and look good, while your low motion scenes can be low bandwidth and not take up very much space.
I see what you mean, I was however referring to it's great expanse and possibilities. mp4 will kick even s3ms arse.
http://siokaos.org/
I seem to remember a while back some company was trying to push an mp4 audio spec as a sucessor to mp3. Seems only logical that if that seemed likely, mp3.com would want to buy the domain name rights.
Looks like somebody beat them to the mp4 format punch, so to speak.
----
----
"I used to listen to Null Device before they sold out."
The mac decoder I have requires you to download windows media player to get the codec.
I've heard bad things about windows player for mac so I didn't bother..
How much harder is MPEG-4 on the decoding hardware when compared to MPEG-3?
I ask because I have a satellite TV decoder that uses MPEG-3, and in high-action sequences, I get to see a lot of jaggy blocks, since the decoder can't keep up with the data...
It doesn't happen too often, but at the worst times. You're paying attention to the action and all of a sudden *POOF*, the most intense area of the screen get's ugly and blocky for a sec or two.
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
Yup, 350Mb/hr is not that big a deal. I've downloaded 650Mb ISO images with my Cable Modem and then burned it the next day. Don't think I would be worried about downloading a couple hours' worth of video data if it was something I wanted to watch.
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
How can we know if, say, an ASF file is encoded with MPEG 4? The size would be bigger than the average ASF right?
Is there a web site that offers LEGAL MPEG 4 content?
And what id would that be? Because when you clicked on the "User Info" link it went to the real CmdrTaco's homepage, not the fake one. Are you just talking pants?
It says that Windows Media Player will play them, but what is used to encode the files? Also.. whats with the calling of it DivX? DanteAliegri.
-- What doesn't kill you hasn't tried hard enough.
Thank you, Kevin. Yes, yes, yes, it is MPEG-4! By the way, check out http://sound.media.mit.edu/mpeg4/. I think this spec could finally superseed MIDI and MPEG-4 could make MIDI-type files that always sound the same, inside of the present problem. Ever compare the ever-present Yamaha OP-3 with Melody Assistant's Enhanced Sound Set? Wide range Gotta love the name "DivX". A copyright violating techonogly's who's very name is a trademark violation!
DREAM LOUD!
350 Mb is a little much to download, though, even with DSL. But with 40 Gig hard drives selling for $259 at CostCO, some of those MPAA fears about copyright infringement may not be so far-fetched.
The cake is a pie
An average film can be burnt onto a CDR as that compression rate, and I think that the lower quality the image, the better the film. I know that Star Wars in MPEG format (with the wandering V) was much more enjoyable to watch than Star Wars at the cinema. South Park in Real Player was better than South Park on TV.
Better quality in these days of ultra-crisp films etc can detract from the film in my opinion. I like watching poor quality blurred, fuzzy illegal copies of films sometimes. If MP4 is better than MPEG1 in terms of quality, even if it is more compressed (they have had 8 years to improve their algorithms!) then I think it will gain a market.
But 600Mb to download an ISO image of the latest films... on a 1Mbit DSL connection say, that would take 4800seconds minimum, which is 80 minutes, just over an hour - you can watch it whilst downloading it as well! Not surprising actually, as it was developed for DSL TV applications.
Now on a modem getting 50kbit a second! 25hours, I don't see many people living with that, they will pay the £5.00 to see it at the cinema.
This will let them put so much more video footage in poor computer games though. Excellent. Wing Commander 10 anybody, with 30 hours of video footage and 1 hour of gameplay?
Actually the problem there is your processor speed. 350Mhz really isn't enough on the Mac side to play thsese files. (Keep in mind it's MPEG-4 video AND MP3 audio - the video at least is not going to have any hardware help unlike MPEG1) - 300Mhz x86 is BARELY passable and it does drop frames too. Keep in mind that the PPC code is much more inefficient because Microsoft never really developed these things for PPC. The mac codec out there is simply fairly slow. Try it on a 450Mhz mac and you'll see what I mean.
Ever hear of IE for UNIX and how bad it sucked? Don't bother with Media Player on the Mac.
I tried playing one of these compressed clips on the MS Media Player for Mac, and it was dog slow and dropped frames like mad. It was totally unusable on a 350 MHz blue G3 with 196 megs RAM. I've seen MUCH better video using QuickTime on a PowerMac 6100... at 60 Mhz.
This is just a MS play at locking in the pirate community and using that momentum to displace legitimately used codec.
There are techniques such as smoothing that improve the usual compression rates of standard MPEG... it's just that bare bones software does not offer it. What Linux needs is something like Media Cleaner, for MPEG.
Q: (Why is it that most of those MPEG music videos, played under Linux, have all bad colors and bad sync among the compression tiles? I've never seen a MPEG play fine even on a fast Linux box, but they work fine in Windows ro the Mac)??
Correct me if I'm wrong; but if I read it right this is the format that has been shipping in some of M$'s 'Advanced Streaming Format' - in which case the latest Media player already deals with this; and I have seen pirate videos in this format already.
Anyone know for sure?
GodboltBlog
MP4 at hand!
Salvation! ev'ry South Park
On one shiny disc
C'T was spending the money to get the highest quality listening devices possible for two reasons: 1) eliminate playback variances and 2) make sure the listeners could hear the minute differences.
However, I personally hate hearing distortions from my MP3s which is why I use 128-bit VBR and -V 1.
--
Ben Kosse
Remember Ed Curry!
My guess? MP4 goes the way of the dodo in 6 mos. BUT, a newer, higher quality version will come out in its place shortly thereafter. The only difference is that the new one will have some poor encryption all over it and a spinning MPAA logo at the bottom of the frame.
"See, we plan ahead! That way, we never have to do anything now."
Call me pedantic but if you remove any low freq components (particularly dc components) from a video signal you will seriously degrade it's performance. In a video signal, any colours that doesn't change much(eg. backgrounds etc...) are reproduced with lf.
So this is a little like apples to oranges.
Until we(as a commercial populace) get bigger pipes, this is the sort of technology that will be popular. Even with the advent of bigger and badder video cards, this form of compression may fit very well with the ability of many people's systems. Someday we will all live in a fiber optic world with realtime streams that aren't compressed...but till then..
I've been quite happy with the windows media player on my mac... It runs fine, it just sucks, as in when it streams data, it just can not figure out a way ensure an uninterupted viewing... Even after you watch a movie from start to finish, and play again, it streams it again.
So... err... actually, i'm not at all happy with it. But at least hasn't messed up my machine any. It doesn't crash, either... That's what I meant by being happy with it.
If you want to use a product that makes use of Microsoft's proprietary codec's, you're going to need to download the binary from Microsoft. Patents/copyrights... Opensource/shareware/freeware/any other developers can't distribute microsoft's binaries with their own if their product needs access to it, unless they've licensed it from Microsoft... even though it's distributed freely.
But since i went through that whole thing in saying it, someone here will probably just post a link to it on their machine... what's IP worth these days when you've got slashdot?
I am currently archiving all of my old VHS recordings to CD. Using this codec to compress the video would be a completely legitimate use, since I am not redistributing anything, I am simply converting my private collection to another format.
Now, in all honesty, I'm not using DivX, I'm using MPEG-1, since I want to burn Video CD's that can be played back on a normal DVD player. But if I were satisfied with PC only playback, then DivX would be a great codec for this (legitimate) purpose.
MP4 has been around for while now, and microsoft media player allready has support for it, if you get the latest version(and hope it doesnt brake 10 other things) I remember using the mp4 codec for compressing videos from my capture card, mainly cause it can compress 30 fps in real-time on a pII 450 LdM314
God damn! If you think mp3 sounds like crap, use something else! For most people, and this would explain the HUGE following mp3 has, they either can't hear the difference or don't care. I can't tell the difference when you take a mp3, decode to wav, and then burn the wav to a CD and play on a high quality CD player. I suspect a lot of the problems people have with sound quality are because their computer audio is crap, or their encoder is crap. Or the CD player used to rip the disc is crap.
IMHO, I love mp3, it sounds great, the quality is incredible - I have a $2000 setup in my car, I use a diamond rio for the playback, and it's crystal clear. The rio sounds a lot better than any of the sound cards I've heard. (on the stereo - those headphones are crappy). The rio sounds good on my sony reference headphones at work, too.
You might have a different opinion. Have you ever had your hearing tested to see exactly what you can hear? Most people (myself included) have a hard time with sounds over 18kHz. Some people are a lot worse.
If you don't like it, DON'T use it. You didn't pay anything for it. If it's crap in your mind, just use something else, or make it better! Bitching doesn't help anyone.
Mpeg-4 looks sweet, too - but the video source makes *all* the difference. Just pointing out there are a LOT of problems that could happen besides the codec.
Kudos
..don't panic
True :) I have to say I prefer Signail 11 to Signal 11 by a long shot... My fake CmdrTaco troll resulted in Rob changing the Slash code to convert & to & within an hour, possibly the fastest bug fix in the history of /. Guess he didn't like being impersonated for some reason ;-)
"MP3" is not restricted to MPEG 1. MPEG 2 layer 3 audio is better suited for very-low-bitrate aplications than MPEG 1 layer 3, for example.
< tofuhead >
It is still the dark of night.
By now you should all know that PNG / MNG is better than GIF and Vorbis is better than MP3 (in both cases, the open format prevails). So where's the better, open format for MPEG-4?
Kenneth (advocating Vorbis for the fifth time on Slashdot)
I remember downloading the original sourcecode for M$ codec a while back.
I'd be interested to know how they can continue to improve and update the codec, if all they are working from is binaries. Disassembly is NOT much of an option on this sort of code.
So it looks like the folks at mp3 will be going through some interesting times again! They will have been thru the legal hassles again, at least they will have experience. Okay, next:
I didn't check all the way to mp666.com..but
I don't think I wil be alive to see this one....maybe you don't have to be!
-rvr
Well, as far as converting from DivX, it's simply a matter of changing the 4cc codes, but that doesn't do anything for the AVI format.
Still, from what I've read, it's not too clear if these new boxes will handle a DVD-style format (with MPEG-4 encoded video files) or simply play AVI or ASF files from a CD-R. Considering the proliferation of DivX movies on the internet (pubs, newsgroups, web) I wouldn't be too surprised to see a few Chinese DVD players handling them this way.
My Apex AD-600A reportedly handles CD-Rs with mpg files placed in the root directory (though I haven't check that out personally), so it's not too much of a leap.
Handling ASF would be preferable, since most bootlegs are two-part VCDs transcoded to DivX... and those can be easily stitched together with a simple text ASX file (AVI or ASF segments)
As for audio, WMA support is gaining acceptance in the portable audio world, so perhaps it could be supported by the player as well (Oh, by the way, Layer 3 audio works great with MPEG-1 files played on many "Chinese" DVD players)
Did anyone notice that mp3.com already owns mp4.com?
Their legal troubles will never end!!
--
My idea for interpolation. So you have two values, and the only thing you know is what the values are, and where they are on a scale
1......4
--------
If you have a predefined size Sine wave, you can interpolate through without having to worry about linear/logarithmic error. You just slide the wave over until it fits just dandy.
http://siokaos.org/
Because if it is, I expect the film industry will do its level best to see it made inaccessible to open source, since it might result in a "filmapster" at some potential future time. Besides with digital video tech becoming cheap, they're likely worried about the people they see as "mere consumers" usurping their industry.
If any of you techies out there are good at video codecs, perhaps you could look into helping the Ogg project's video compression design, so we can have a really good patent proof and free-to-use film codec.
Please, please, PLEASE let's not start calling this MP4. As many of you know MP3 isn't MPEG-3. It's MPEG-2, Audio Layer 3, shortened to MP3.
While MP3 probably shouldn't have been named such, let's not exacerbate the mistake by making another one. MPx should relate specifically to the audio compression specification, while MPEG-x should continue to relate to the entire audio/video specification.
Hopefully, when MPEG-4's audio specification catches on in audiophile circles, MP4 will be used specifically to mean audio files adhering to the MPEG-4 Audio Layer specs.
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox