My latest hyperfixation
-
but... HEVC?
There are still a lot of issues with adaptation of HEVC, especially with chromium based browsers on linux. Probably due to the patent fees or... whatever.
https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/hevc-support-and-cpu-load-in-brave-or-vivaldi-browser/72984
https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/40101
This isn't just a Brave issue, but affects basically all Chromium forks other than Thorium and... the other one I forgot the name of lol.
I can't play any of the example hevc encodes, regardless of used flags/arguments. Vaapi set up correctly, and working everywhere else.BUT, for the one person on here with the same issue, using Jellyfin. Thorium browser gets updated once in a blue moon, but does have a workaround for HEVC decoding, and if you don't wanna use that, Jellyfin Media Player seems to be using mpv as the player backend, doesn't seem to be just an electron wrapper, and works great.
Furryfox works fine too. -
Somebody save my CPU.
made with Krita
FINALLY MY KINDA WOMAN
-
Somebody save my CPU.
made with Kritawrote last edited by [email protected]I'll take any excuse I can get to dump my perspective here. I love AV1 for video and I hate AVIF with a passion. Every video that I create is delivered in AV1, because it is incredibly useful, versatile and extremely powerful. Right tool for the right job.
Not that there's anything inherently wrong with AVIF other than it tries to force a video codec into something that is that it is not meant for, namely a still image codec. I hate the drama around it that Google has created. Because the stupid cunt that created AVIF is an emotional slime, he tried to block JPGXL, a competitor for AVIF, from having official support in the Google Chrome browser. And because Google Chrome is a monopoly in the browser market, CDNs and other people who'd like to use JPGXL, since it has significantly better all around features for still images, cannot use it now.
Features of JPEG-XL:
- better still image compression than AVIF
- lossless JPEG transcoding
- progressive image loading
- universally usable from capture to delivery
- layer support with 4,099 channels
- CMYK Compatible
- 32 bits per channel
- no limitations on image size or colour precision
And all of that is thrown away because one bastard has his feelings hurt by user choice.
Thank you for listening to my useless TED Talk.
Edit: While I sound extremely black-pilled about this, because monopolies are bad, the positive thing is that it's gaining traction, finally. Apple has fully embraced it some time ago. Now Microsoft Windows supports it natively as well. Literally the only missing piece is the browser. While Safari, thanks to Apple, - never thought I'd say that - now supports JPEG XL natively, Firefox and Google Chrome do not as of right now. So the browser is literally the last missing link for full native support. Also, I'd wish for the people at Mozilla to stop letting themselves be cucked by Google. But JPEG XL is around the corner, luckily, because sooner or later they will be forced to use the modern format to stay competitive, like Samsung already does for their phone cameras. Still salty about the attempt, though.
-
There are still a lot of issues with adaptation of HEVC, especially with chromium based browsers on linux. Probably due to the patent fees or... whatever.
https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/hevc-support-and-cpu-load-in-brave-or-vivaldi-browser/72984
https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/40101
This isn't just a Brave issue, but affects basically all Chromium forks other than Thorium and... the other one I forgot the name of lol.
I can't play any of the example hevc encodes, regardless of used flags/arguments. Vaapi set up correctly, and working everywhere else.BUT, for the one person on here with the same issue, using Jellyfin. Thorium browser gets updated once in a blue moon, but does have a workaround for HEVC decoding, and if you don't wanna use that, Jellyfin Media Player seems to be using mpv as the player backend, doesn't seem to be just an electron wrapper, and works great.
Furryfox works fine too.I'm using MX Linux and Firefox, I'll test the browser. But using VLC it's no problem here.
-
Why didn't it fully embed the avif
Edit 1: Might be just jerboa.. Yahaw it's investigation time.
Edit 2: Shows up fine on Lemmy-ui, Photon, Raccoon but not Jerboa and Thunder!In Voyager, everything works.
-
I'm using MX Linux and Firefox, I'll test the browser. But using VLC it's no problem here.
Yeah, external players like mpv and vlc are perfectly fine. Works on FF for me too. Seems like the issue pops up every couple of months with droves of people posting on random forums all around.
-
Ah, but are you using aomenc, SVT-AV1 or rav1e? Or one of the forks maybe?
noob here
is DAV1D a thing as well ?
-
I'll take any excuse I can get to dump my perspective here. I love AV1 for video and I hate AVIF with a passion. Every video that I create is delivered in AV1, because it is incredibly useful, versatile and extremely powerful. Right tool for the right job.
Not that there's anything inherently wrong with AVIF other than it tries to force a video codec into something that is that it is not meant for, namely a still image codec. I hate the drama around it that Google has created. Because the stupid cunt that created AVIF is an emotional slime, he tried to block JPGXL, a competitor for AVIF, from having official support in the Google Chrome browser. And because Google Chrome is a monopoly in the browser market, CDNs and other people who'd like to use JPGXL, since it has significantly better all around features for still images, cannot use it now.
Features of JPEG-XL:
- better still image compression than AVIF
- lossless JPEG transcoding
- progressive image loading
- universally usable from capture to delivery
- layer support with 4,099 channels
- CMYK Compatible
- 32 bits per channel
- no limitations on image size or colour precision
And all of that is thrown away because one bastard has his feelings hurt by user choice.
Thank you for listening to my useless TED Talk.
Edit: While I sound extremely black-pilled about this, because monopolies are bad, the positive thing is that it's gaining traction, finally. Apple has fully embraced it some time ago. Now Microsoft Windows supports it natively as well. Literally the only missing piece is the browser. While Safari, thanks to Apple, - never thought I'd say that - now supports JPEG XL natively, Firefox and Google Chrome do not as of right now. So the browser is literally the last missing link for full native support. Also, I'd wish for the people at Mozilla to stop letting themselves be cucked by Google. But JPEG XL is around the corner, luckily, because sooner or later they will be forced to use the modern format to stay competitive, like Samsung already does for their phone cameras. Still salty about the attempt, though.
Thank you for your TED Talk. I had no idea about the creator of AVIF or anything, BUT, I still really like that I can just use the same knowledge when it comes to transcoding jpegs/whatever to it. It uses the same codec, same parameters, supports animations, is like 1/100th the size of gifs...
I guess webp can do that latter part as well, but having a single tool able to do these things is neat in my opinion. (Please don't come at me, systemd haters)
I think jxl also supports waaaaay higher resolutions and everything. So yeah, fair argument that I'm not, in any way, against.
Compression and accessibility are just really fascinating things to me, and I'm sure once the next huge, well-supported thing, comes around, so will I. -
I'll take any excuse I can get to dump my perspective here. I love AV1 for video and I hate AVIF with a passion. Every video that I create is delivered in AV1, because it is incredibly useful, versatile and extremely powerful. Right tool for the right job.
Not that there's anything inherently wrong with AVIF other than it tries to force a video codec into something that is that it is not meant for, namely a still image codec. I hate the drama around it that Google has created. Because the stupid cunt that created AVIF is an emotional slime, he tried to block JPGXL, a competitor for AVIF, from having official support in the Google Chrome browser. And because Google Chrome is a monopoly in the browser market, CDNs and other people who'd like to use JPGXL, since it has significantly better all around features for still images, cannot use it now.
Features of JPEG-XL:
- better still image compression than AVIF
- lossless JPEG transcoding
- progressive image loading
- universally usable from capture to delivery
- layer support with 4,099 channels
- CMYK Compatible
- 32 bits per channel
- no limitations on image size or colour precision
And all of that is thrown away because one bastard has his feelings hurt by user choice.
Thank you for listening to my useless TED Talk.
Edit: While I sound extremely black-pilled about this, because monopolies are bad, the positive thing is that it's gaining traction, finally. Apple has fully embraced it some time ago. Now Microsoft Windows supports it natively as well. Literally the only missing piece is the browser. While Safari, thanks to Apple, - never thought I'd say that - now supports JPEG XL natively, Firefox and Google Chrome do not as of right now. So the browser is literally the last missing link for full native support. Also, I'd wish for the people at Mozilla to stop letting themselves be cucked by Google. But JPEG XL is around the corner, luckily, because sooner or later they will be forced to use the modern format to stay competitive, like Samsung already does for their phone cameras. Still salty about the attempt, though.
I wonder how we're feeling for HEIC? Any drama/pros/cons I should know of? As AAPLs weight is behind, I wonder if we'll get browser wars for this decades' image formats.
-
I'll take any excuse I can get to dump my perspective here. I love AV1 for video and I hate AVIF with a passion. Every video that I create is delivered in AV1, because it is incredibly useful, versatile and extremely powerful. Right tool for the right job.
Not that there's anything inherently wrong with AVIF other than it tries to force a video codec into something that is that it is not meant for, namely a still image codec. I hate the drama around it that Google has created. Because the stupid cunt that created AVIF is an emotional slime, he tried to block JPGXL, a competitor for AVIF, from having official support in the Google Chrome browser. And because Google Chrome is a monopoly in the browser market, CDNs and other people who'd like to use JPGXL, since it has significantly better all around features for still images, cannot use it now.
Features of JPEG-XL:
- better still image compression than AVIF
- lossless JPEG transcoding
- progressive image loading
- universally usable from capture to delivery
- layer support with 4,099 channels
- CMYK Compatible
- 32 bits per channel
- no limitations on image size or colour precision
And all of that is thrown away because one bastard has his feelings hurt by user choice.
Thank you for listening to my useless TED Talk.
Edit: While I sound extremely black-pilled about this, because monopolies are bad, the positive thing is that it's gaining traction, finally. Apple has fully embraced it some time ago. Now Microsoft Windows supports it natively as well. Literally the only missing piece is the browser. While Safari, thanks to Apple, - never thought I'd say that - now supports JPEG XL natively, Firefox and Google Chrome do not as of right now. So the browser is literally the last missing link for full native support. Also, I'd wish for the people at Mozilla to stop letting themselves be cucked by Google. But JPEG XL is around the corner, luckily, because sooner or later they will be forced to use the modern format to stay competitive, like Samsung already does for their phone cameras. Still salty about the attempt, though.
I converted most of my images to .jxl. It's been pretty nice.
-
I've tried all three! SVT flies in comparison to AOM on my 5800X.
Still playing around with ffmpeg settings, film grain synthesis and planning on properly checking out av1an.
I just love the codec so much, tiny bitrates but still beautiful. Then I learned .avif uses the same libraries as well and takes up like 1/10th of what my pngs do. (played around with webp/m before, pretty impressed with that as well..)
Wonderful stuffwrote last edited by [email protected]Same here, I wonder why SVT is not included with ffmpeg's standard compile flags. Licencing?
The era of decent full HD movies on CD has come, finally a use for all my CD-R spindles!
-
Somebody save my CPU.
made with Kritawrote last edited by [email protected]I tried AV1, but it seems to work really poorly for compressing film grain which is my main usecase (movies).
I realise you can add fake film grain, but that's not really my thing.
I'm sure it's great for video game footage or low grain modern video, but that's not what I need it for.
For now, I'll likely stick with x265.
-
Somebody save my CPU.
made with KritaDisk is cheap, just make everything mpeg2.
-
I wonder how we're feeling for HEIC? Any drama/pros/cons I should know of? As AAPLs weight is behind, I wonder if we'll get browser wars for this decades' image formats.
HEIC faces a few struggles with adoption:
- It's patent encumbered.
- It's not free as in "free beer", someone has to pay for it.
- It's not free as in "free speech" - you can't use, modify, and distribute software or formats without restrictions due issue #1.
AV1 and AVIF don't have any of these issues –someone correct me if I'm wrong or missing something– so anyone is able to include/distribute the software and modify to their needs.
-
Disk is cheap, just make everything mpeg2.
bring back .3gp to share with your classmates
-
Somebody save my CPU.
made with KritaNot only is everything smaller, but the codec looks better. Compression artifacts when AV1 is really pushing it at lower bitrates are more like... pointillism? They resemble grain instead of the fuzzy squares you can get with 264 or 265, and it is especially better in dark scenes.
-
Somebody save my CPU.
made with KritaI did a comparison of AV1 vs h265 on a handful of video files I have in different styles. H265 seemed consistently better. AV1 just crushes the quality way too much.
-
Disk is cheap, just make everything mpeg2.
-
Not only is everything smaller, but the codec looks better. Compression artifacts when AV1 is really pushing it at lower bitrates are more like... pointillism? They resemble grain instead of the fuzzy squares you can get with 264 or 265, and it is especially better in dark scenes.
But it looks much worse at higher bitrates. H265 can get decent bitrates and have no visible difference from the original. AV1 loses a bunch of quality right out of the gate. If you are wanting to archive footage I think h265 is much better.
-
What if I offload it to my 487?
The 487 was just a full 486DX with a pin that told the motherboard to deactivate the soldered-on 486SX.
