video compression [geek thread]

by **marc** » November 3rd, 2003, 6:45 am

so i met a guy last week that claims he is able to do 1000:1 video compression, without any serious loss of quality.

being the sceptic that i am, i went along for a demo.

TV quality video, with almost no artefacts, and a high quality stereo soundtrack... 20 minutes of it... in a 2.5MB file.

Apparantly with a quite simple compression algorithm.

discuss....

by **Adam** » November 3rd, 2003, 6:54 am

Is this Apple's Pixlet thing?

by **van** » November 3rd, 2003, 6:55 am

jesus. that sounds glorious.

by **Shaneus** » November 3rd, 2003, 7:00 am

Imagine the porn... but it has to be impossible though. Don't you think that if it existed, we would've caught wind of it already? Way I figure it, the ability to fit 20 minutes of high quality _audio_, let alone video is newsworthy.

Skeptical.

by **van** » November 3rd, 2003, 7:01 am

maybe we're the first :shock:

by **Ches** » November 3rd, 2003, 7:24 am

Dan Rutter sums up my opinion quite nicely at the bottom of this letters column:

http://www.dansdata.com/danletters069.htm

by **Adam** » November 3rd, 2003, 7:49 am

Charles Bloom works up a quick coder that will compress random bytes down to about 6 bits per byte. Quite a feat, but it doesn't stand up to close scrutiny.

Ahaha. Just buy another hard drive ffs.

by **marc** » November 3rd, 2003, 7:54 am

well, the repercussion of all this is that he's streaming tv quality video and audio down a 28K connection...

and no, it's not pixlet.

Ches wrote:Dan Rutter sums up my opinion quite nicely at the bottom of this letters column:

http://www.dansdata.com/danletters069.htm

oh yeah, that's the technology i'm talking about - adam's platform.

by **Simon** » November 3rd, 2003, 8:02 am

Having read the Dan Rutter peice about it, I'd say the repercussions are nill because it's all bullshit!

by **marc** » November 3rd, 2003, 8:04 am

Simon wrote:Having read the Dan Rutter peice about it, I'd say the repercussions are nill because it's all bullshit!

well then it's some awesome smoke and mirrors, because i saw it work... over a modem.... after inspecting all the hardware...

by **Shaneus** » November 3rd, 2003, 8:12 am

If it was a real test, then let them bring your own PC in, transfer one single file to it then play. It's the only guarantee that it's not b/s. It's certainly possible that they're just streaming random data, and the file is stored on the PC locally.

by **Adam** » November 3rd, 2003, 8:12 am

Sorry Marc but it sounds like bollocks to me too, but if I see it working I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong.

by **marc** » November 3rd, 2003, 8:21 am

yeah, i know - i was very very sceptical at the start too...

the problem is that i'm finding less and less reasons to doubt them.

final test is next week when we bring in a formatted hard drive and make them stream video to it.

by **Adam** » November 3rd, 2003, 8:24 am

What's the standard?

by **Ches** » November 3rd, 2003, 8:25 am

Make sure you check the powercables for hidden Cat 5

Seriously marc, read all the links Dan gives in that article before you next test this tech.

by **Miles** » November 3rd, 2003, 9:01 am

marc wrote:
Simon wrote:Having read the Dan Rutter peice about it, I'd say the repercussions are nill because it's all bullshit!

well then it's some awesome smoke and mirrors, because i saw it work... over a modem.... after inspecting all the hardware...

Nah. Bullshit. If you actually do the theory on any of this stuff you realise why it's impossible. 1000:1? Working already? Then why isn't it out on the market?

BULLSHIT.

by **Tim** » November 3rd, 2003, 9:02 am

hahahaha, marc, that's gold. Never mind the fact that it breaks the rules of information transfer, that's fine dude, go give him some money and make millions. Bwahahaha.

by **marc** » November 3rd, 2003, 9:10 am

GUYS, I KNOW !!!!!!

I didn't believe it either...

but tell me how it's happening then....

clean hard drive, clean machines, no wi-fi, no hidden cat 5, nothing !!!!!

by **Adam** » November 3rd, 2003, 9:12 am

by **marc** » November 3rd, 2003, 9:13 am

how ? no network connection...

by **Adam** » November 3rd, 2003, 9:15 am

by **Ches** » November 3rd, 2003, 9:17 am

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/ ... 26766.html

Deja vu?

by **marc** » November 3rd, 2003, 9:21 am

same guys - same company - same algorithm.

other than the technology working as promised, i can't see any other way of making this happen...

and so far i've spent 2 full days with both of these guys, and more to come...

by **Ches** » November 3rd, 2003, 9:25 am

So what happened to Ericsson and Oracle?

How's that patent coming along, anyway?

by **Simon** » November 3rd, 2003, 9:28 am

If it's for real, it will be nothing short of revolutionary.

I'm massively skeptical though, I mean ffs, nobody has been able to get audio down to that sort of compression, let alone full motion video!

video compression [geek thread]

video compression [geek thread]

Who is online