There used to be the Zoran MJPEG chipsets used for hardware compression/decompression in video editing boards. Maybe they're still around.
robert
There used to be the Zoran MJPEG chipsets used for hardware compression/decompression in video editing boards. Maybe they're still around.
robert
Found the answer:
robert
On a sunny day (Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:07:20 -0700) it happened "Pete Fraser" wrote in :
Eh, 'pgm' is a standard like ppm. On Unix (or Linux) type: man pgm man ppm I only used it because somebody else used it. ppm (color) is even 3 x bigger). Maybe it would be a bit faster using a binary format.
I used 'gif' first, but then cjpeg told me it was not an open format.... I think gif patent has expired now: # cjpeg q1.gif > q1.jpg GIF input is unsupported for legal reasons. Sorry.
:-) LOL
I think a binary format would be much faster. I think most of thee time is taken in reading the ASCII image file.
PPM/PGM support both ascii and binary formats. The major advantage of ppm/pgm is the very simple parsing. If you write a minimalist implementation, reading the header ask for little more than scanf.
As temporary or interchange file format, it's fine.
Best,
S.
How very bizarre. I suppose that some implementations the algorithms for jpeg may be encode / decode asymmetric (they should not be). My digital camera uses jpeg encoding in many modes, on a very ordinary computer not using Manufacturer specific software, the pictures appear immediately. My camera does not seem to spend much time encoding the pictures either, it has modes to take 5 frame groups varied by f-stop, and it is always ready as soon as i press the shutter button again. I really doubt that even with a custom jpeg IP FFT component that the algorithm takes all that much time.
As for the very, very poor performance of that particular PC program, i will never use that program. thanks for the review. How about you write a better program, i am sure that you can. (yes i have been through your web site, seen years of your posts, etc.,)
-- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens. --Schiller
I don't know about you but at 800 X 600 i expect it to perform at 30 FPS or more encode or decode.
-- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens. --Schiller
On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:08:01 GMT) it happened joseph2k wrote in :
Hi, thank you for the compliment. I am writing some other program atm.. Just after I wrote that thing about the FPGA, I got an Altera email pointing to this:
I myself have a small digital video camera that directly encodes to mpeg4....
640x480@30fps, on SDcard, so there are chips for that too it seems.The other way is buying a Sony PS3, it has a Cell processor, runs Linux, and there are I think 6 peripheral processors available, but programming those is not easy. PS3 is expected to fall in price by about 100$ (or Euro) before the end of the year.... This may be cheaper then FPGA.... gives you some good games too :-)
On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:10:54 GMT) it happened joseph2k wrote in :
If you think 'mplayer' or 'xine' yes, it does many more fps then 30 in mpeg2 and Divx etc. on my box. Only H264 is slower. But I think this is highly optimized code written in asm.
There is a difference between 'encoding' and 'decoding' it seems.
mcamip
Me, too. (-:
It contains a couple of assembly optimizations, truely.
For JPEG-1, encoding and decoding are rather symmetric. It shouldn't make much of a difference.
Definitely. It was only a very very rough test to get some numbers, nothing more.
So long, Thomas
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.