[Mp4-tech] RE: Why spatial prediction in AVC performed in pixel domain?

Gary Sullivan garysull windows.microsoft.com
Mon Aug 27 08:45:33 EDT 2007


Have you actually done any experiments to confirm your belief that the frequency domain works better on noisy material?
Of course, also, not all material is noisy...
Gisle Bjontegaard proposed the basic concept of the spatial prediction as part of his original proposals in 1998 for the H.26L project (Q15-E-17 in July and Q15-F-11 in November).  I believe he had been playing with such concepts before that as well.  I'm rather confident that he would not have proposed such a thing unless it was ordinarily beneficial to compression capability.
Best Regards,
Gary Sullivan
________________________________
From: mp4-tech-bounces lists.mpegif.org [mailto:mp4-tech-bounces lists.mpegif.org] On Behalf Of Shevach Riabtsev
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2023 4:51 AM
To: mp4-tech lists.mpegif.org
Subject: [Mp4-tech] Why spatial prediction in AVC performed in pixel domain?
Dear experts
The spatial prediction in AVC is executed in pixel (sample) domain, while in MPEG2 and MPEG4 the spatial prediction (actually partial prediction) is performed in frequency domain.
I think that on noisy material it is beneficial to perform the spatial prediction in frequency domain in the same manner as pixel-domain prediction.
Say, for each 4x4 block, DCT and quantization is performed, then the prediction direction and the residual between quantization coefficients of the current 4x4 block and the neighboring (left and/or top) is calculated.
What was a reason to prefer the sample domain for the spatial prediction instead of frequency one.
 Regards,  Shevach
Broadcom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/mp4-tech/attachments/20070827/357bfc26/attachment.html


More information about the Mp4-tech mailing list