compression is the key to effective delivery
There can be no misunderstanding about this,
although you may wonder why you need to bother with compression
(and decompression).
The answer is simple.
You need to be aware of the size of what you put on the web
and the demands that imposes on the network.
Consider the table, taken from (phone: 56 Kb/s, ISDN: 64-128 Kb/s, cable: 0.5-1 Mb/s, DSL: 0.5-2 Mb/s)
you must be careful to select a media type that is suitable for your
target audience.
And then again, choosing the right compression scheme
might make the difference between being able to deliver or
not being able to do so.
Fortunately,
Why this is so is explained in statistical redundancy in signal irrelevant information B. Vasudev & W. Li, Memory management: Codecs codec = (en)coder + decoder
codec design problem
From a systems design viewpoint, one can restate
the codec design problem as a bit rate minimization problem,
meeting (among others) constraints concerning: 1
MPEG-1 video compression uses both intra-frame analysis, for the compression of individual frames (which are like images), as well as. inter-frame analysis, to detect redundant blocks or invariants between frames.
frames
media uncompressed compressed voice 8k samples/sec, 8 bits/sample 64 kbps 2-4 kbps slow motion video 10fps 176x120 8 bits 5.07 Mbps 8-16 kbps audio conference 8k samples/sec 8bits 64 kbps 16-64 kbps video conference 15 fps 352x240 8bits 30.4 Mbps 64-768 kbps audio (stereo) 44.1 k samples/s 16 bits 1.5 Mbps 128k-1.5Mbps video 15 fps 352x240 15 fps 8 bits 30.4 Mbps 384 kbps video (CDROM) 30 fps 352x240 8 bits 60.8 Mbps 1.5-4 Mbps video (broadcast) 30 fps 720x480 8 bits 248.8 Mbps 3-8 Mbps HDTV 59.9 fps 1280x720 8 bits 1.3 Gbps 20 Mbps
The actual process of encoding and decoding may
be depicted as follows:
Of course, the coded signal must be transmitted accross some channel,
but this is outside the scope of the coding and decoding issue.
With this diagram in mind we can
specify the codec design problem:
...
compression methods
tradeoffs
For example, when we select a particular
coder-decoder scheme we must consider whether we can guarantee
resilience to transmission errors
and how these will affect the users' experience.
And to what extent we are willing to accept
degradations in decoder output,
that is lossy output.
Another issue in selecting a method of compression is
whether the (compressed)
data representation allows for browsing & inspection.
And, for particular applications, such as conferencing,
we should be worried about
the interplay of data modalities,in particular, audio & video.
With regard to the many existing codecs and the variety
of platforms we may desire the possibility of
transcoding to other formats
to achieve, for example, exchange of media objects between tools,
as is already common for image processing tools.
compression standards
As will be explained in more detail when discussing the
MPEG-4 standard in section 3.2, there are a number of
advantages with an object-based approach.
There is, however, also a price to pay.
Usually (object) segmentation does not come for free,
but requires additional effort in the phase of authoring
and coding.
MPEG-1
Decoding takes place
by first selecting I-frames, then P-frames,
and finally B-frames.
When an error occurs, a safeguard is provided by
the I-frames, which stand on themselves.
GigaPort
system | spatial resolution | frame rate | mbps |
NTSC | 704 x 480 | 30 | 243 mbps |
PAL/SECAM | 720 x 576 | 25 | 249 mbps |
item | streaming | downloaded |
bandwidth | equal to the display rate | may be arbitrarily small |
disk storage | none | the entire file must be stored |
startup delay | almost none | equal to the download time |
resolution | depends on available bandwidth | depends on available disk storage |
formats
Quicktime, introduced by Apple, early 1990s, for local viewing; RealVideo, streaming video from RealNetworks; and Windows Media, a proprietary encoding scheme fromMicrosoft.
Examples of these formats, encoded for various bitrates
are available at Video at VU.
(C) Æliens
04/09/2009
comparison of codecs