Maker Pro
Maker Pro

"Real WMV", 148.50 mhz sample-rate, 1920 X 1080 progressive scan image, "object data" bit-rate of 1

R

Radium

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi:

I apologize profusely for my persistance on this topic. Hopefully this
will be the last time -- unless of course, I get even more curious!
From the responses I've received to my previous, I conclude that both
WMV with 1-bit file size as well as WMV with an object-data bit-rate of
1 bit-per-second are impossible. What about 1-byte-per-second?

Is it possible to have "Real WMV", with 148.50 mhz sample-rate, 1920 X
1080 progressive scan image, and an "object data" bit-rate of 1
byte-per-second?

Your understanding and cooperation are greatly appreciated.


Thanks,

Radium
 
R

Radium

Jan 1, 1970
0
Bob said:
Yours would be, as well. Think a whole lot more about just how
much information you can carry in one byte, and what that implies
for what you're trying to do.

Bob M.

The minimum bit-rate required is so interesting yet so confusing. Is
there a mathematical equation in which I can find the lowest bit-rate
required?
 
B

Bob Myers

Jan 1, 1970
0
Is it possible to have "Real WMV", with 148.50 mhz sample-rate, 1920 X
1080 progressive scan image, and an "object data" bit-rate of 1
byte-per-second?
No.

Your understanding and cooperation are greatly appreciated.

Yours would be, as well. Think a whole lot more about just how
much information you can carry in one byte, and what that implies
for what you're trying to do.

Bob M.
 
Q

Quanta

Jan 1, 1970
0
Radium said:
The minimum bit-rate required is so interesting yet so confusing. Is
there a mathematical equation in which I can find the lowest bit-rate
required?

Required for what???????

You need to go to a school where these issues are explained, I suppose. Are
you under 10?
 
K

Ken Maltby

Jan 1, 1970
0
Radium said:
The minimum bit-rate required is so interesting yet so confusing. Is
there a mathematical equation in which I can find the lowest bit-rate
required?

Look, "the minimum bit-rate" is a subjective quantity.

Long before you get to the lowest bitrate that any
encoder will function at, you would have unrecognizable and
unwatchable video. And the theoretical "minimum bit-rate",
as your threads seem to turn into; is not something that an
encoder could approach.

Your question has no practical value.

Luck;
Ken
 
P

Pete Fraser

Jan 1, 1970
0
The minimum bit-rate required is so interesting yet so confusing. Is
there a mathematical equation in which I can find the lowest bit-rate
required?

You appear to be pathologically uninterested in doing any research
other than asking a succession of questions of this group.

Why don't you download a video compressor, and try it
on some images / video sequences. See for yourself what
sort of quality you get at various bit-rates.
 
M

Michael A. Terrell

Jan 1, 1970
0
Pete said:
You appear to be pathologically uninterested in doing any research
other than asking a succession of questions of this group.

Why don't you download a video compressor, and try it
on some images / video sequences. See for yourself what
sort of quality you get at various bit-rates.


HE IS A TROLL! He does this crap all the time.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
 
R

Radium

Jan 1, 1970
0
Ken said:
Look, "the minimum bit-rate" is a subjective quantity.

Long before you get to the lowest bitrate that any
encoder will function at, you would have unrecognizable and
unwatchable video.

What is the lowest bit-rate that the most flexible video encoder will
function at?
 
R

Radium

Jan 1, 1970
0
Pete said:
You appear to be pathologically uninterested in doing any research
other than asking a succession of questions of this group.

Thats because there is no info available as to how low a bit-rate that
a WMV encoder will tolerate.
Why don't you download a video compressor, and try it
on some images / video sequences. See for yourself what
sort of quality you get at various bit-rates.

WMV compressors aren't available.
 
R

Radium

Jan 1, 1970
0
Bob said:
Yours would be, as well. Think a whole lot more about just how
much information you can carry in one byte, and what that implies
for what you're trying to do.

Bob M.

Okay. 1-bit file size wont work. 1-bit-per-second bit-rate is
impossible as well. 1-byte-per-second is anymore capable of existing.
How about "Real WMV", with 148.50 mhz sample-rate, 1920 X 1080
progressive scan image, and an "object data" of 1kbps?

WMA can have a bit-rate of 20 kbps despite having a sample-rate of 44.1
khz. Couldn't WMV also have a bit-rate less than its sample-rate? I
hope so but am SO SO unsure of whether its possible or not.
 
M

Martin Heffels

Jan 1, 1970
0
WMV compressors aren't available.

It shows how bad you've done your research. Any program which can encode
video, can compress to WMV.

-m-
--
 
R

Richard Crowley

Jan 1, 1970
0
"Radium" wrote...
What is the lowest bit-rate that the most flexible video encoder will
function at?

OK, which is "the most flexible video encoder"?
Do you see the problem with your question here?
 
R

Richard Crowley

Jan 1, 1970
0
"Radium" wrote...
Okay. 1-bit file size wont work. 1-bit-per-second bit-rate is
impossible as well. 1-byte-per-second is anymore capable of existing.
How about "Real WMV", with 148.50 mhz sample-rate, 1920 X 1080
progressive scan image, and an "object data" of 1kbps?

How many frames per hour were you thinking of?
WMA can have a bit-rate of 20 kbps despite having a sample-rate of 44.1
khz. Couldn't WMV also have a bit-rate less than its sample-rate? I
hope so but am SO SO unsure of whether its possible or not.

Why don't you just try it and find out directly instead of trolling for
2nd hand opinions from the rest of us?
 
B

Bob Myers

Jan 1, 1970
0
Radium said:
The minimum bit-rate required is so interesting yet so confusing. Is
there a mathematical equation in which I can find the lowest bit-rate
required?

Again, do some research. THINK about what a single bit
or byte really conveys. In other words, here's one bit of information
- what sort of a question can that single bit answer? Here's
eight bits, that we have called a "byte." How many decisions
can you make based on THAT information?

Now, how many such "decisions" are necessary to recreate a
single frame of 1920 x 1080 video (just as one example)?
You don't know enough at this point to precisely answer that
question, but if you've really thought about what the previous
questions mean, it should be quite clear that it's WAY more
than a single bit or byte.

Bob M.
 
B

Bart

Jan 1, 1970
0
1920 X 1080 is over 2meg pixels. Codec software allows for compressions
below 20%. That takes 2meg down to 400k-bits or 12.5k-bytes of 32-bit data.
Proprietary firmware minimizes additional bits for color, even up to 16.1
million colors. The 12.5k-byte "packet" can be decompressed with just a few
clock cycles. If sampling occurs before the next packet is decompressed, the
currently decompressed packet, or "page", is held or repeated for display.
High sampling frequencies are easily achieved with hardware and will always
be waiting on data through-put and software decompressions. Look up the
slowest refresh rate of your monitor and also decide on a "frames per
second" rate (DVD is 30 frames per second). Investigate your data
through-put AND your computer's front side bus speed AND your AGP
multiplication.
To answer your question, yes, you can have 148.5mhz sampling with a 1-byte
per second object data rate if you can find a way to slow your through-put.
For streaming video, I suggest a "com redirector" that creates a virtual com
port from an IP address and allows you to set baud rates as low as 150 bits
per second. Then use a quad digital divider.
HTH
Bart

Oh, at a one bit per second data rate, you'll wait for 27.77 hours for the
first frame to appear, and then 27.77 hours for the next frame to appear. I
mean, we all like slow-mo when it comes to porn but COME ON!
 
K

Ken Maltby

Jan 1, 1970
0
Bart said:
1920 X 1080 is over 2meg pixels. Codec software allows for compressions
below 20%. That takes 2meg down to 400k-bits or 12.5k-bytes of 32-bit
data. Proprietary firmware minimizes additional bits for color, even up to
16.1 million colors. The 12.5k-byte "packet" can be decompressed with just
a few clock cycles. If sampling occurs before the next packet is
decompressed, the currently decompressed packet, or "page", is held or
repeated for display. High sampling frequencies are easily achieved with
hardware and will always be waiting on data through-put and software
decompressions. Look up the slowest refresh rate of your monitor and also
decide on a "frames per second" rate (DVD is 30 frames per second).
Investigate your data through-put AND your computer's front side bus speed
AND your AGP multiplication.
To answer your question, yes, you can have 148.5mhz sampling with a 1-byte
per second object data rate if you can find a way to slow your
through-put. For streaming video, I suggest a "com redirector" that
creates a virtual com port from an IP address and allows you to set baud
rates as low as 150 bits per second. Then use a quad digital divider.
HTH
Bart

Oh, at a one bit per second data rate, you'll wait for 27.77 hours for the
first frame to appear, and then 27.77 hours for the next frame to appear.
I mean, we all like slow-mo when it comes to porn but COME ON!


Maybe I've been approaching these threads in the wrong way.
I should be more helpful, so why should "Radium" restrict himself
to a whole pixel? If he really wants to get it down there he should
consider "Qtr Pixels", I use them all the time with my AVC/H264
encoding.

Luck;
Ken
 
R

Radium

Jan 1, 1970
0
Bart said:
1920 X 1080 is over 2meg pixels. Codec software allows for compressions
below 20%. That takes 2meg down to 400k-bits or 12.5k-bytes of 32-bit data.
Proprietary firmware minimizes additional bits for color, even up to 16.1
million colors. The 12.5k-byte "packet" can be decompressed with just a few
clock cycles. If sampling occurs before the next packet is decompressed, the
currently decompressed packet, or "page", is held or repeated for display.
High sampling frequencies are easily achieved with hardware and will always
be waiting on data through-put and software decompressions. Look up the
slowest refresh rate of your monitor and also decide on a "frames per
second" rate (DVD is 30 frames per second). Investigate your data
through-put AND your computer's front side bus speed AND your AGP
multiplication.
To answer your question, yes, you can have 148.5mhz sampling with a 1-byte
per second object data rate if you can find a way to slow your through-put.
For streaming video, I suggest a "com redirector" that creates a virtual com
port from an IP address and allows you to set baud rates as low as 150 bits
per second. Then use a quad digital divider.
HTH
Bart

Oh, at a one bit per second data rate, you'll wait for 27.77 hours for the
first frame to appear, and then 27.77 hours for the next frame to appear. I
mean, we all like slow-mo when it comes to porn but COME ON!

You are talking about slowing the data rate, slow-motion and decreasing
the baud-rate. I don't want any of that. I want the frame-rates to
remain fast. The only thing I want compressed is the color-depth.
 
R

Radium

Jan 1, 1970
0
Ken said:
Maybe I've been approaching these threads in the wrong way.
I should be more helpful, so why should "Radium" restrict himself
to a whole pixel? If he really wants to get it down there he should
consider "Qtr Pixels", I use them all the time with my AVC/H264
encoding.

Luck;
Ken

I don't want to restrict to just one pixel. I want 1920 X 1080
progressive scan image.
 
Top