home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
- Path: sparky!uunet!world!ivanski
- From: ivanski@world.std.com (Ivan M CaveroBelaunde)
- Subject: Re: semi-technical QuickTime info required...
- Message-ID: <BxF8nt.5zw@world.std.com>
- Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
- References: <1992Nov8.091942.8451@msc.cornell.edu>
- Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:45:29 GMT
- Lines: 94
-
- maynard@leah.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley) writes:
- >Based on the way Apple and others claim the Apple animation compressor
- >should be used, I would guess that it performs RLE encoding. Does it just
- >do the standard PICT RLE encoding? Is this simply along the x direction, or
- >is it done along both x and y directions?
-
- I believe that in lossless mode it is basically the standard PICT RLE
- coding (x-direction only). In lossy mode (which only works on direct color
- modes, 16/24/32 bpp) it uses some sort of color difference computation
- (probably RGB, not really sure) to append pixels to the "runs."
-
- >"None"-encoding. Is this truly none, or does it do the basic PICT
- >compression?
-
- No, it's truly none.
-
- >Apple graphics---what gives here? The only thing I know about this is that
- >I have yet to find anything for which it works nicely. Does it insist on
- >the system pallette? Does it needs globs of the same color?
-
- I have had generally good results with it. It's optimized for 8-bit
- error-diffused images - should work with any palette.
-
- >Apple video. Looks like it does the JPEG scheme of blocking, but what else.
- >I
- >guess it's not simply JPEG diddled a bit, cause of the speed.
-
- It's block-based, but I think it has nothing to do with JPEG. The
- algorithm is licensable from Apple, I believe.
-
- >The new Apple compact video. What's this based on? Wavelets? It produced
- >artifacts unlike anything I've seen elsewhere.
-
- It's a VQ (Vector Quantization) scheme, which is similar to finding an
- optimum CLUT for an image. You basically have a color map (called a
- codebook) and you map each pixel to the closest color in the codebook.
- The codebook then is updated as the color usage statistics change.
-
- >2) Is ANY form of inter-frame compression performed when making movies? I
- >thought that when you gave a key-frame rate, that meant that each key-frame
- >was stand-alone, but other frames were based on inter-frame encoding.
-
- It depends on the compressor (JPEG does not support interframe coding)
- for example. With photorealistic-type compressors such as Apple Video
- you will not get much from interframe coding unless you lower the
- spatial compression quality setting. There is also a parameter called
- "temporal quality" that controls the sensitivity for interframe coding.
- In Apple's compression dialog, it's generally available by holding
- down the option key and using the same quality slider.
-
- But you are right as far as what key-frame rate means. If you set
- it really high (3200 frames), then you will only have one full frame and
- then nothing but differences. Random access performance will suck badly,
- but it should play pretty well linearly.
-
- If you are writing your own code to call the QuickTime routines,
- there are a couple of flags that must be passed to the sequence
- compression calls for them to work properly (UsePrevFrame + UsePrevFrameComp
- or some such).
-
- >I've tried varying the key-frame rate from zero to every frame and in
- >between, and the file size seems to change each time by about 2K, which
- >seems to imply not much is happening. The various key-frame rates also
- >seemed to have no effect on quality of playback, either forwards OR
- >backwards. Is this just a bogus field that will be used in later versions
- >of QuickTime?
-
- They work fine for me; experiment a bit.
-
- >3) What is the major bottleneck in playback speed? It seemed to me that
- >this would be decompression. However on my SE/30 a (grey-scale 150x200)
- >movie made at
- >15fps plays back rather more smoothly when compressed with either Apple
- >Animation or Apple Compact Video than with no compression, and compact
- >video gave better playback than animation. (At ten fps all three schemes
- >were equal so I guess the machine wasn't yet maxed out.) Is this because in
- >fact most of the time is data transfer time, and the compressed movie have
- >to pull less data off disk? Or is it some effect of grey-scale? I haven't
- >yet got around to experimenting seriously with color movies so I don't know
- >what would happen there.
-
- The main bottleneck will vary. Basically the data has to come in from the
- disk, be massaged by the decompressor, and blitted up onto the screen.
- If the time it takes to decompress the image is less than the additional
- time it would take to read the extra uncompressed data from the disk,
- then the disk is the bottleneck. In general, the bottleneck will be the
- disk with a fast CPU, and the decompression on a slow CPU. The
- speed of your graphics display (say, internal VRAM vs Nubus card) may also
- be critical. The only answer is "it depends."
-
- -Ivan
- ---
- Ivan Cavero Belaunde
- DiVA Corporation
-