W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > May 2009

[whatwg] Suitable video codec

From: Michael Dale <dale@ucsc.edu>
Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 08:45:35 -0700
Message-ID: <4A04539F.7050301@ucsc.edu>
yea.. the take home point is that Theora now has an encoder that puts it 
in the same ballpark as contemporary proprietary codecs. I would not say 
Theora is "outdoing h.264". The results of a given PSNR test are 
impressive and important to publicize but I think my wording in posting 
about that test might have promoted overstating the quality factor.

The only quality that really mattered in terms of standardization has 
stayed constant: which is Ogg Theora is /royalty free/ and implementable 
in both proprietary and free software browsers.

--michael

David Gerard wrote:
> H.264 was advocated here for the <video> element as higher quality
> than competing codecs such as Theora could ever manage.
>
> The Thusnelda coder is outdoing H.,264 in current tests:
>
> http://web.mit.edu/xiphmont/Public/theora/demo7.html
>
> This is of course developmental work. I'm sure the advocates of H. 264
> can also tune its encoders to keep up, and not make Theora the only
> reasonable candidate for the <video> element.
>
>
> - d.
Received on Friday, 8 May 2009 08:45:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:49 UTC