3 ms·

>Constrained Baseline Profile up to Level 5.2 (4096x2304) Well, I wasn't expecting miracles from this, but constrained baseline profile only? That's very disap

by Daiz 13y ago

>Constrained Baseline Profile up to Level 5.2 (4096x2304) Well, I wasn't expecting miracles from this, but constrained baseline profile only? That's very disappointing. Not only will this be unable to decode most of the H.264 content out there (web and otherwise), you could very likely get better results with VP8. If only they'd have endorsed something like libavcodec instead...

leetrout 13y ago
Seriously... So much for adaptive bit rate. Makes sense that Cisco would be using CBP after seeing this on Wikipedia: "this profile is most typically used in videoconferencing and mobile applications" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Profiles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Profiles
- Daiz 13y ago
  >Makes sense that Cisco would be using CBP Yes, I can understand the encoder only supporting CBP - videoconferencing is the one thing that you really need encoding capabilities for in a browser. Anything else you can basically always encode offline and use x264 or whatever. The real shortcoming is the fact that the decoder is also limited to CBP - as I said, this makes it completely useless for decoding most H.264 video out there (which is either Main or High Profile, generally the latter if we're talking HD content), web or otherwise.
  - cfluffy 13y ago
    This codec is designed more for interactive video conferencing applications and is not really great for non interactive encoding of a movie for playback. The choice of CBP came from that is what the IETF is considering to specify for the WebRTC standards.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
espadrine 13y ago
The real challenge for Cisco is to play well with contributors. While initially, members of the project seemed to be from the same Cisco family, it looks welcoming: https://github.com/cisco/openh264/blame/master/CONTRIBUTORS https://github.com/cisco/openh264/blame/master/CONTRIBUTORS

by Daiz 13y ago

leetrout 13y ago

Seriously... So much for adaptive bit rate. Makes sense that Cisco would be using CBP after seeing this on Wikipedia: "this profile is most typically used in videoconferencing and mobile applications" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Profiles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Profiles

Daiz 13y ago
>Makes sense that Cisco would be using CBP Yes, I can understand the encoder only supporting CBP - videoconferencing is the one thing that you really need encoding capabilities for in a browser. Anything else you can basically always encode offline and use x264 or whatever. The real shortcoming is the fact that the decoder is also limited to CBP - as I said, this makes it completely useless for decoding most H.264 video out there (which is either Main or High Profile, generally the latter if we're talking HD content), web or otherwise.
- cfluffy 13y ago
  This codec is designed more for interactive video conferencing applications and is not really great for non interactive encoding of a movie for playback. The choice of CBP came from that is what the IETF is considering to specify for the WebRTC standards.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

espadrine 13y ago

The real challenge for Cisco is to play well with contributors. While initially, members of the project seemed to be from the same Cisco family, it looks welcoming: https://github.com/cisco/openh264/blame/master/CONTRIBUTORS https://github.com/cisco/openh264/blame/master/CONTRIBUTORS