Loki Software to Open Source SDL Motion JPEG Library 55
Loki Games has announced that they will be undertaking their 3rd Open Source project, the SDL Motion JPEG Library. SMJPEG creates and displays full motion video with a non-proprietary format created by Loki. It was developed while porting Railroad Tycoon II: Gold Edition. Check out their website for more details. Suffice to say that "among its many benefits, SMJPEG allows for arbitrary video sizes and frame-rates, user-tuneable compression levels,
and facilities for frame-skipping and time synchronization," according to Loki.
Great stuff (Score:1)
Similar to motion jpeg codec? (Score:3)
If so, it's quite useful for local playback and editing, and provides very high quality, since each frame is basically just a jpeg. But without any attempt at delta compression, it results in stonking bitrates.
Very useful for editing though.
On further reading this looks more like an MPEG format, since it is based on MPEG 1 code. That would be a pity, since MPEG 1 fills its niche badly, while motion JPEG filss its niche well. However, I can see why a games company would want an MPEG (low bitrate/low quality) format more than a high bit rate high quality format.
Motion JPEG? (Score:1)
Makes skipping to random points MUCH easier than with MPEG, but makes the files 10 times bigger, because you don't do inter-frame compression the way MPEG does.
I couldn't tell from the press release whether it was the same thing or something entirely different.
Nice move!
Cool! (Score:1)
Source already available (Score:5)
SMJPEG documentation [lokigames.com]
SMJPEG source code [lokigames.com]
BlueSky
way to go loki (Score:1)
now, if only we could get a gpl'd quicktime implementation...
ajit
Another Linux success story. (Score:3)
Re:Similar to motion jpeg codec? (Score:1)
--
Linux development for businesses (Score:1)
Nice one Loki.
QuickTime Player for Linux (Score:3)
I forget when OS X Consumer is out... Spring maybe?? That *doesn't* mean a Linux version will be out then, what I heard implied was we might get a clearer picture..
Basically the issue for those that don't know is, OS X Consumer is a UNIX BSD-based ("the other Linux" as someone put it, although it's technically innaccurate) implementation, and since OS X is commercial that will be "competing" for mindshare. Releasing a QuickTime for Linux before OS X would kind of steal Apple's thunder... QuickTime is one of the few world-class technologies they have left that can be sold, and great QT support IS still a basis for buying a Mac for some people.
I see both sides of this, and it is frustrating not to have a robust and well-supported video system in Linux. It's not *entirely* Apple's fault as some would state.. I don't see Red Hat and SuSE funding some GPL'd alternative (which without compatible codecs is moot anyhow). Apple doesn't "owe" the any platform a player - they owe their stockowners results. Anyways, It's fantastic to see some free good work out there.... thanks LOKI! I don't think a company should "own" a video delivery system any more than a phone (or cable...) company should have a monopoly .
The FIRST person I talked to at Apple's booth said "if I wanted QuickTime on UNIX I'd have to buy OS X". Great.. does OS X run Linux binaries? Oh, wait, they quietly smothered OS X for Intel (remember?). "Der...":-/
Hhm.. (Score:1)
- Talence
Giving back to the community. (Score:4)
What was the problem with Quicktime (Score:1)
>The audio chunks should be encoded one frame >ahead of the video chunks
Don't do this. Instead encode one second of audio data ahead of the first second of video data.
Mildly off topic? One never knows.. (Score:1)
Of course, Loki would be less than worthless as a company if they open sourced their games (well, unless they used something similar to the NPL rather than the GPL.. and they wonder why its mainly Netscape that does the development work for Mozilla..?), although they are already a step ahead of id Software (even though I do so love Wolfenstein/Doom/Quake).
I've been thinking a lot about the pros and cons of commercial vs. free software.. and I believe that games (excepting rather simple ones) should probably remain the domain of commercial programming. Of course, I believe that games should remain reasonably low cost, but then again, I might be sort of biased since I'm designing the layout and other nifty things that will form the foundation for a 3D fully interactive RPG using anime-style graphics (am I nuts or what?).. Well, ones hopes, at least.
And, back to the point, perhaps? Since games of all sorts use stylized characters that the designers and/or companies would like to keep a hold of, GPLing such programs would not be the most productive thing in the world toward this end. Not to mention the fact that these things are strictly entertainment, not any kind of means to an end, besides killing boredom. Reusable tools (like the libraries Loki develops in the course of producting their games) and simple games should remain the focus of this arena.
Re:What was the problem with Quicktime (Score:2)
As far as I know there are no open source initiatives to actually produce a CODEC for high quality and low bitrate image data.
Rumor has it that Sorensen has stated that Apple prohibits them from open sourcing their CODEC. I'm not sure how true it is. It may be closer to reality that Apple wouldn't be happy about it after paying large fees to make use of it. The other half of the equation might be that even if Apple didn't care one way or the other Sorensen still wouldn't. CODECs are expensive pieces of intellectual property to create, it may well be that Sorensen uses Apple as a convenient scape goat.
Re:What was the problem with Quicktime (Score:2)
Re:QuickTime Player for Linux (Score:1)
Time to market (Score:1)
If the boot were on my foot, I would concentrate my efforts on code to convert games written for Windows to this SMJPEG or SMPEG-based platform... then let the developer community perfect the rendering code. If they are doing this for a number of different games, they minimise their time-to-market, and I feel that the market for linux games is going to be a large one (my HDD gets shot of Windows as soon as there are a decent number available).
Having said this, I heartily applaud what Loki have done, and I wish them every success, if only for making the leap of faith.
Re:Smacker (Score:1)
Re:What was the problem with Quicktime (Score:1)
For those interested, MainConcepts has a low cost MJPEG codec that is compatible with many of the popular video capture cards. They are also developing a DV codec that will enable you to output DV compatible video without requiring acess to a 1394 device. Not open source, but low cost and will be available for both Windows and Linux this fall.
http://www.MainConcepts.com.
Great Idea (Score:2)
Other stuff coming....
Though it won't be open source as far as I know, a company in Germany called Main Concepts is currently developing a low cost Video Editing system for both Windows and Linux. They are also developing(or already developed) a software only DV codec that should have generally higher quality than MJPEG with lower bit rate requirements (basically about 25Mb or 3MB per second throughput). DV, unlike MJPEG is lossless. The great thing will be the ability to encode/decode DV video without the requirement to be attached to a 1394 device. The company is very commited to the Linux platform.
Please no Flames, just putting out some info.
http://www.mainconcepts.com
Film Archiving? (Score:1)
I have inherited a box full of 8mm, Super8mm, 35mm slides and photographs dating back as far as the 1940's. My aim is to scan and encode each film and store them on CD or DVD before they deteriorate. Part of the process is designing and building an 8mm/Super8 film scanner (which I can do). The other aspect is figuring out how to store them efficiently.
I am assuming that since these are JPEGS, I should be able to manipulate them (i.e. color enhance, etc.) and save an important aspect of family history.
Re:Motion JPEG? (Score:5)
Bigger yes, but not ten times bigger. I've done some experiments. A 600x400 image compresses down to 15k with some minor artifacts, and 24k with some almost-invisible artifacts. Reduce that to 300x200 and you are looking at 8 or 9k. My experience of watching compressed video is that the motion reduces the visual impact of the artifacts because they keep changing randomly, while the eye tends to track the image. So you should be able to get away with some 15k per frame. Maybe slightly less because these figures include picture headers that would be factored out of MJPEG.
At 15k per frame and 25 fps that is 375k/sec, or 1.35Gb/hour, which is about twice MPEG-1. Plus sound of course. But radio quality sound only needs about 8k/sec, so we can ignore that for now.
Has anyone tried doing this in real-time? It strikes me that we might have a DIY version of the TiVO here.
Paul.
Been using Quicktime for almost a year (Score:1)
More efficient storage than M-JPEG possible (Score:1)
Loki deserve to succeed (Score:3)
Re:More efficient storage than M-JPEG possible (Score:1)
Where can I get good, low-cost MPEG encoders?
Not too fast, pard'ner. (Score:1)
Note: I am not saying Linux is bad. I'm just saying that Linux is not as suited for gaming as other platforms. Of course, this should be common knowledge around here... and if it is, then heck, why the hell am I typing this anyway?
Re:Not too fast, pard'ner. (Score:1)
Re:QuickTime Player for Linux (Score:1)
The question is: Which API does QuickTimeX run on? My guess is that it's not the BSD API (too bad for Linux), and instead either OpenStep or Carbon. If Apple is going to support QuickTime for Linux, they will probably have to create a seperate Unix/X Window application.
Re:Loki deserve to succeed (Score:1)
Me and a friend of mine tried it under Linux, and again under Windows. The Windows version could run circles around the Linux version, stop to take a breath, have lunch, then leisurely walk to a finish line, and STILL leave the Linux version in the dust. It was that bad.
CivCTP, IMHO, is a neat way of saying "Yes, it is very possible right now to make games for Linux, but ultimately Linux still sucks as a gaming platform."
(Disclaimer: This is from the endluser perspective, please don't flame me for being technicially innacurate because I don't know the technical details
"I don't believe that there is one, single, perfect spiritual way and, in realizing that, obviously you become a lot more open."
Re:Loki deserve to succeed (Score:1)
Re:Loki deserve to succeed (Score:1)
Re:QuickTime Player for Linux (Score:1)
I made a shitload of noise on the Quicktime-talk mailing lists about a truly cross-platform version of QuickTime (the player and codec modules). I don't care too much about a Linux version, but I want the QuickTime format (which is wonderful) to get a wider spread than it has, particularly on un*x machines.
The first comments were basically "Have your vendor licence it from Apple." and "Won't it be great for that vendor to be the one offering QT?" Comments about the Windows client (not licenced by Microsoft) petered out to market share talk, which makes sense, although it's ever so unfair. Apple would not make the big money from a vendor licence, but rather from owning the major format for digital media. They don't seem to understand this.
OK, this costs a lot of money, and ofcourse was not the kind of answer I was hoping for -- in my eyes Apple would be the one to benefit from spreading their technology. This was from Charles Wiltgen [mailto], who is the QT Technology manager at Apple. Feel free to write him, but don't expect much understanding.
I don't see Red Hat and SuSE funding some GPL'd alternative (which without compatible codecs is moot anyhow)
This is exactly what Wiltgen meant by a vendor licencing it, and he hinted that RedHat had just completed a very successfull IPO. Should we leave it up to one of them to do this?
Wiltgen has, however, promised me that they will revisit the case of a true cross-platform QT player. We can only wait, I guess.
Re:Smacker (Score:1)
I'll definitely check it out.
Re:Mildly off topic? One never knows.. (Score:1)
Re:Smacker (Score:2)
Re:Not too fast, pard'ner. (Score:1)
^~~^~^^~~^~^~^~^^~^^~^~^~~^^^~^^~~^~~~^~~^
Re:Ask and you shall receive (Score:2)
No you haven't.
The QT4Linux libraries are development libraries, and do not posess hardly any of the features of the QT player as developed by Apple. And certainly, the most interesting codecs (Sorenson, Qdesign) are not included.
Although the libraries are great, and we're using them for a M-JPEG project right now, they're not to be confused by the player proper, so please don't pretend that they are.
init 1, or optimized gaming runlevel (Score:1)
Myself, I find games run excellently under Linux in its normal configuration, but them I'm spoiled with a fast CPU and lots of memory -- it takes something like Windows 98 or NT to really slow it down.
MJPEG vs MPEG (Score:3)
Linux Media Labs [linuxmedialabs.com] offers MJPEG hardware for Linux and I want to comment on some widespread misconceptions about MJPEG vs. MPEG performance.
Full rate, broadcast quality signal (D1) at 720x480@30frames/sec with 4:2:2 color (2 bytes/pixel) has a data rate of 20 MByte/sec. Now, with 1:10 compression the image quality is very good, especially since there is 60 fields per second with noise caused by lossy compression averaged out. So, D1 quality requires 2 Mbyte/sec bandwidth. That is about 7 Gbyte/hour. DVD disks have 4.7 Mbyte of capacity and hold about 2 hours of video. Therefore with all hoops and patents MPEG-2 has 3 times better performance. I would argue though that D1 encoded with MJPEG at 1:10 compression is much better quality then DVD, and don't forget that it's a 4:2:2 color, not 4:2:0 one as in DVD.
Let up now go to VHS (MPEG1) qualiity and also reduce frame rate to 15 frames/sec. There would be no flicker since our video frame buffer still allows our CRT to be refreshed at 60 fields per second. 320x240@15frames/sec at 4:2:2 (2 bytes/pixel) gives us 2.2Gbyte/sec uncompressed and with 1:15 JPEG compression (certainly better then VHS) gives 150 Kbyte/sec. MPEG1 data rate is about 180Kbyte/sec - i.e. MPEG1 is no better then simular quality MJPEG.
Advantages of MJPEG:
Therefore maybe Linux should use MJPEG as a standard for handling video.
Speaking of codecs - nothing prevents Open Source community from creating a first class MJPEG codec. As a matter of fact we're working right now on a MJPEG viewing application, simular to xanim from the user prospective but optimized for MJPEG with the requirement to playback 720x480@30fps on resonable hardware and it's under GNU GPL of course. If anybody has some top performing (assembly language?) JPEG code (DCT/Huffman) or desire to work on such (under GNU GPL) I would like to talk very much.
Vassili Leonov vleo@linuxmedialabs.com [mailto]
OOPS! (Score:1)
Re:Loki deserve to succeed (Score:1)
"I don't believe that there is one, single, perfect spiritual way and, in realizing that, obviously you become a lot more open."
no windowmanager (Score:1)
If you want even better performance, customize a runlevel with fewer things playing, but before you do that, renice the game to a higher priority, that should help out to minimize the effect or anything except memory intensive background programs.
--
smothered? (Score:1)
Re:MJPEG vs MPEG (Score:1)
Full rate, broadcast quality signal D1 at 720x480@29.97frames/sec with 4:1:1 (DV, MiniDV, DVCam) only needs 3MB per second. And its lossless. All Consumer/Prosumer based DV Camcorders support this format. Not quite as good as 4:2:2, but excellent quality none the less.
Re:no windowmanager (Score:1)
Or, even simpler:
start X with
xinit
- initializes X11, and starts the client you specified. (a window manager in general...)
minimize the effect or anything except memory intensive background programs.
Or I/O intensive background...
it SO bloats a (E)IDE System - UDMA doesn't help that much
..? (Score:1)
Really? I thought I saw something about some id guy saying that the games would never be open source because that's their bread and butter or whatever. I'm not about to fire up my Web browser to search it out, though.