they should be kicked out
no idea what the fuck they doing there
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>In January 2018 the alliance's website was quietly updated to add Apple as a governing member of the alliance. >October 1, 2019, Tencent joined as a governing member.
it's over
Isn't Apple huge on 444 color and the like? Does AV1 even support that?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yeah.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
not on the main profile
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>High/Professional only
At least it supports it at all, so there is that. But I guess that isn't enough for Apple just yet.
Then again, NV/AMD still only support AV1 8bit 420 encoding, so there is that.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
nvenc does 10bit and is decent, amd idk but is trash
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Wait, shit, you're right. I meant to say NVENC AV1 doesn't support 444, only 420 at 8bit or 10 bit. >amd idk but is trash
Funny enough I heard that their AV1 is pretty decent, but their system is also muddled as fuck.
Their AV1 works on a completely different chip, separate from their AVC and HEVC encoding, cuz they got AV1 from a company they bought it.
On top of that their professional GPUs got a different (way better) AV1 chip than consumer GPUs got.
Still better than nothing, if it ever happens. VP9 is a GIGANTIC upgrade over VP8, when even 264 would've been a huge upgrade.
AV1 is another upgrade over VP9, while also having huge speed implications thanks to SVT.
TLDR; Everything is better than VP8.
but it does support vp9
it's just missing for regular 1080p, which is something I've never seen before, normally every video has the same codecs for every resolution
also they could use h264 as a fall-back but they don't idk why, on web it does fall back to h264 if you have av1 decoding disabled
Ohhh, my bad, shoulda re-read what you said. >It has VP9 for everything except regular 1080p
That is.. just why? Feels like a odd bug in their system or some shit, or them forcefully only using AV1 to test something, or whatever other cope I can think of.
>Still better than nothing, if it ever happens. VP9 is a GIGANTIC upgrade over VP8
maybe you didn't know but, LULZ already supports vp9 webms, it's just that 99% of users are retarded naggers that still use vp8/vorbis for """MUH compatibility""""" as always >Feels like a odd bug in their system
It is >or them forcefully only using AV1 to test something
nah, that doesn't make sense
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>maybe you didn't know
I'm fully aware of that since day one, my point is that VP9 is slow as fuck, except if you like dog shit quality. >or """MUH compatibility"""""
Meanwhile I encode my stuff in 12bit just to spite toddlers and everything else >nah, that doesn't make sense
True, but I would've accepted that as a weird ass excuse. A lot of the time I don't trust google in making smart decisions.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>my point is that VP9 is slow as fuck
It really is, but most webms here are 30 second 340p stuff, is everyone here rocking Q6600's or something? like come on just wait for a few minutes for fuck's sake, vp8 is literally unwatchable
also we don't need 320 kbps vorbis audio for your 50 kbps vp8 video thanks (i really do see shit like this sometimes) >Meanwhile I encode my stuff in 12bit just to spite toddlers and everything else
nah don't do that anon, I also phonepost sometimes 🙁 now I know whose webms fail to load on my pixel 4a, fuk u
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>vp8 is literally unwatchable
also we don't need 320 kbps vorbis audio for your 50 kbps vp8 video thanks (i really do see shit like this sometimes)
I fucking hate that shit like you have no idea. Meanwhile I try to optimize my webm's to a degree, making the audio 64kb opus for fast downloading, and crf 30-50 for the video.
I bet the majority of people are still using CBR cuz they can't be asked to encode things multiple times for it to be efficient, wasting bits on scenes that don't fucking need it. >nah don't do that anon
I WILL CONTINUE TAKING A SHIT ON PHONES FAGS AND YOU CAN'T STOP ME
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I WILL CONTINUE TAKING A SHIT ON PHONES FAGS AND YOU CAN'T STOP ME
fine 🙁
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
btw (same nagger as the previous reply) I never made any webms for LULZ and I had actually thought LULZ had a maximum webm resolution of 720p
So you are telling me that it's just an encoding skill issue???
Jesus christ
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>max res of 720p
last time I checked the maximum was 1080p, which shouldn't be used for anything but short and simple clips like what I post, otherwise use whatever res gets you under 4mb.
That you should use vp9 by default is a given, without discussion. VP8 is trash, always was, always will be. Literally worse than 264, in every possible way. >you telling me it's just a skill issue?
yes, always has been.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
very cool, thanks anon
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
No prob, glad to be of use.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>VP8 is trash, always was, always will be
This. vp8 is so fucking shit that your video turns B&W when the bitrate isn't high enough. Posting vp8 webms should be a bannable offense
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
It blows my mind whenever I find a VP8 file in my reaction folder, esp (new type) sound ones which appeared AFTER VP9 became a thing.
so av1 webms in 2026?
nah sounds too optimistic, that nagger can't even add webp support and it's been a common format for like 5 years already
btw shit like this is why I fucking hate apple
iToddlers say "just don't buy apple products if you don't like it!"
but the reality is that this idiotic company is holding technology behind just by existing
we are talking about av1 here, but these fuckers don't even have vorbis/opus support yet on safari, which is why lots of music streaming sites still stream mp3 (such as bandcamp or soundcloud).
Spotify (which normally uses vorbis) even had to transcode their entire library to aac for the web player just for itoddlers
we are stuck in 1990 just because they can't get onboard with this alien 2010 technology
>hates webp >no arguments
classic
and no, the fact your cracked photoshop from 2005 doesn't support the format isn't a good reason to shit on webp
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>worse at lossy compression than JPEG XL >worse at lossy compression than Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder >worse AND slower at lossless compression than JPEG XL
You want me to keep going? Lossy WebP is fucking VP8 keyframes. VP8. You know, the video codec limited to the original NTSC color gamut from the fucking 1950's? >cjxl a PNG with a bunch of PNG tEXt, color profile, XMP, etc. >djxl that JXL >get the same fucking PNG out the other end >cwebp the same PNG >lol fuk ur metadata
It's shit. It needs to die. It needs to take HEIC and AVIF with it.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>JPEG XL
worthless bloated codec that will be dead next year cuz no one cares for it but LULZ cucks like you
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Who's got no arguments now? Fkn moron.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
already been adopted at a way faster rate than WebP and AVIF which are both way older. keep seething.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>You know, the video codec limited to the original NTSC color gamut from the fucking 1950's?
It's not like VP9 or AV1 even improved much on that. Unless you are doing HDR, it's still gonna be the flawed BT 709 matrix coefficients from the fucking 90's.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Wait, really? I'm able to properly use both BT.709 and BT.2020 with VP9 and AV1. Chromium based browsers will also (poorly) tonemap BT.2020 HDR VP9 when viewed on an 8-bit display. The issue with VP8 is that it treats everything as BT.601...
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>The issue with VP8 is that it treats everything as TV content >Not the fact that it's compression is complete and utter dog shit even compared to 264
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
kek I thought that much was implied anon. The fucked up colors no matter how many bits you throw at it are just the icing on the shitcake that is VP8
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>>The issue with VP8 is that it treats everything as TV content
VP8 converts BT709 Colormatrix videos to BT601, it is a limitation of the codec.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
BT 2020, the gamut of HDR, but yes.
The issue is with traditional SDR. BT 709 matrix coefficients encode luma, not luminance. That distinction matters.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
> worse at lossy compression than JPEG XL
Nevertheless WebP would be a step forward for LULZ because (as you can guess it) using JPEG XL is not an option on LULZ
>worse at lossy compression than Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder
Nobody cares because Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder needs Google's own fucking JPEG decoder (knusperli) to look good, and at this point you'd better design Google's own fucking new format (and that's what they did)
You'd better compare WebP with the other Google's own fucking JPEG encoder (jpegli)
> cwebp the same PNG > lol fuk ur metadata
You could use “cwebp -metadata icc” to keep your PNG's color profile, for example. (There are some other CLI options.)
> It needs to die. It needs to take HEIC and AVIF with it.
What do you even have against HEIC and AVIF.
For the first time in history we have an opportunity of saving any keyframe from any AV1 video to an AVIF file without losing its quality (JPEG would introduce such losses) and without greatly inflating its filesize (PNG would be lossless at much greater size).
Same with HEVC (H.265) keyframes in HEIC files.
Also animated AVIF files have all the tools of true cinematic compression and thus in terms of colourspaces and bitrates they're literally the next step of evolution (where the first step was a multitude of huge GIF files with 256 colours per frame and the second step was an unseen multitude of significantly smaller animated WebP files with TrueColor frames, there the third step brings us even smaller animated AVIF files with vibrant 30-bit pixels and awesome bitrates).
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
jesus christ stop it with the insane spacing on such a worthless post
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Nevertheless WebP would be a step forward
lol
lmao, even
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
ilook at all this bloaty bullshit that means jack shit without a proper source
>fancy pants jpeg >fancy pants jpeg >average joe webp >average joe avif
nagger, no one fucking uses these special type of jpgs, only autistic naggers like you do, so the point of webp being better still fucking stands you negro dick sucking fag.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>no one fucking uses these special type of jpgs
Skill issue.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
cjpeg and mozjpeg are just JPEG encoders, like Google's Guetzli + JPEG thing. The files that come out the other fucking end are regular JPEGs, just smaller/better quality than what you'd get out of a regular compressor. WEBP isn't better than fucking anything. Don't you have more dick to suck, James?
>I'm not joking when I say the reason JXL was cockblocked by Chromium might actually be due to internal office politics at Google. We already know Google has used JXL or JXL-related technologies on some other projects and Google technology and engineers were involved in JXL's creation. >The commit to remove JXL support was authored by Google employee James Zern. >https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4081749 >I wonder who authored WebP? >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zern-webp/ >Authors: James Zern, Pascal Massimino, Jyrki Alakuijala >I wonder who the primary contributor to libwebp is? >https://chromium.googlesource.com/webm/libwebp/+log >Weird, it's overwhelmingly James Zern.
> worse at lossy compression than JPEG XL
Nevertheless WebP would be a step forward for LULZ because (as you can guess it) using JPEG XL is not an option on LULZ
>worse at lossy compression than Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder
Nobody cares because Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder needs Google's own fucking JPEG decoder (knusperli) to look good, and at this point you'd better design Google's own fucking new format (and that's what they did)
You'd better compare WebP with the other Google's own fucking JPEG encoder (jpegli)
> cwebp the same PNG > lol fuk ur metadata
You could use “cwebp -metadata icc” to keep your PNG's color profile, for example. (There are some other CLI options.)
> It needs to die. It needs to take HEIC and AVIF with it.
What do you even have against HEIC and AVIF.
For the first time in history we have an opportunity of saving any keyframe from any AV1 video to an AVIF file without losing its quality (JPEG would introduce such losses) and without greatly inflating its filesize (PNG would be lossless at much greater size).
Same with HEVC (H.265) keyframes in HEIC files.
Also animated AVIF files have all the tools of true cinematic compression and thus in terms of colourspaces and bitrates they're literally the next step of evolution (where the first step was a multitude of huge GIF files with 256 colours per frame and the second step was an unseen multitude of significantly smaller animated WebP files with TrueColor frames, there the third step brings us even smaller animated AVIF files with vibrant 30-bit pixels and awesome bitrates).
>What do you even have against HEIC and AVIF.
INTERFRAME VIDEO CODECS SHOULDN'T BE USED AS IMAGE CODECS. FULL STOP.
They weren't fucking designed with that in mind, nor were they optimized for it. They aren't fucking efficient at it. They exist to store keyframes AND b-frames/p-frames.
> worse at lossy compression than JPEG XL
Nevertheless WebP would be a step forward for LULZ because (as you can guess it) using JPEG XL is not an option on LULZ
>worse at lossy compression than Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder
Nobody cares because Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder needs Google's own fucking JPEG decoder (knusperli) to look good, and at this point you'd better design Google's own fucking new format (and that's what they did)
You'd better compare WebP with the other Google's own fucking JPEG encoder (jpegli)
> cwebp the same PNG > lol fuk ur metadata
You could use “cwebp -metadata icc” to keep your PNG's color profile, for example. (There are some other CLI options.)
> It needs to die. It needs to take HEIC and AVIF with it.
What do you even have against HEIC and AVIF.
For the first time in history we have an opportunity of saving any keyframe from any AV1 video to an AVIF file without losing its quality (JPEG would introduce such losses) and without greatly inflating its filesize (PNG would be lossless at much greater size).
Same with HEVC (H.265) keyframes in HEIC files.
Also animated AVIF files have all the tools of true cinematic compression and thus in terms of colourspaces and bitrates they're literally the next step of evolution (where the first step was a multitude of huge GIF files with 256 colours per frame and the second step was an unseen multitude of significantly smaller animated WebP files with TrueColor frames, there the third step brings us even smaller animated AVIF files with vibrant 30-bit pixels and awesome bitrates).
>For the first time in history we have an opportunity of saving any keyframe from any AV1 video to an AVIF file without losing its quality
Literally who gives a fuck? Just take a screenshot you retard. Assuming the scene detection algorithm placed a keyframe exactly where you want to make a cap in the firstplace (SPOILER ALERT: IT DID NOT).
> worse at lossy compression than JPEG XL
Nevertheless WebP would be a step forward for LULZ because (as you can guess it) using JPEG XL is not an option on LULZ
>worse at lossy compression than Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder
Nobody cares because Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder needs Google's own fucking JPEG decoder (knusperli) to look good, and at this point you'd better design Google's own fucking new format (and that's what they did)
You'd better compare WebP with the other Google's own fucking JPEG encoder (jpegli)
> cwebp the same PNG > lol fuk ur metadata
You could use “cwebp -metadata icc” to keep your PNG's color profile, for example. (There are some other CLI options.)
> It needs to die. It needs to take HEIC and AVIF with it.
What do you even have against HEIC and AVIF.
For the first time in history we have an opportunity of saving any keyframe from any AV1 video to an AVIF file without losing its quality (JPEG would introduce such losses) and without greatly inflating its filesize (PNG would be lossless at much greater size).
Same with HEVC (H.265) keyframes in HEIC files.
Also animated AVIF files have all the tools of true cinematic compression and thus in terms of colourspaces and bitrates they're literally the next step of evolution (where the first step was a multitude of huge GIF files with 256 colours per frame and the second step was an unseen multitude of significantly smaller animated WebP files with TrueColor frames, there the third step brings us even smaller animated AVIF files with vibrant 30-bit pixels and awesome bitrates).
>Also animated AVIF files
You mean, VIDEOS? >open GIF >decodes on a fucking potato from 1995 >open AVIF >phone explodes
lmao. I'd take proper APNG support over AVIF.
>iphone 15 >1000 dollar phone
can't even play despacito in 1080p without paying for yt premium because of the lack of av1 decoding
no but seriously guys did nobody notice this? the vp9 1080p encode of despacito has been missing for like 3 months on youtube and now you have to pay to watch it at 1080 on devices without av1 support
like someone could use this to get 90k upvotes on reddit by saying they are locking 1080p behind a paywall even though it's a mistake, I'm blessing all of you with this knowledge
yes I know
It's a joke that's the point
but I also find it funny how nobody notices this like shit's one of the most watched videos on the platforms and it's also the only one to have such weird bug that's so easy to spot
Fair enough, my bad then. I will agree tho, it's weird that a "beloved" often watched video like that wouldn't support VP9 as a baseline, instead only having 264 and AV1.
but it does support vp9
it's just missing for regular 1080p, which is something I've never seen before, normally every video has the same codecs for every resolution
also they could use h264 as a fall-back but they don't idk why, on web it does fall back to h264 if you have av1 decoding disabled
>can't even play despacito in 1080p without paying for yt premium because of the lack of av1 decoding >no but seriously guys did nobody notice this? the vp9 1080p encode of despacito has been missing for like 3 months on youtube and now you have to pay to watch it at 1080 on devices without av1 support
>MODS (who got control) add AV1 >people start posting high quality AV1 clips at 1080p 60 >VP8 homosexuals that didn't change to VP9 yet get confused as fuck as to how people are posting such high quality clips >Meanwhile a bunch of other fags will scream that they can't play the file
Would be funny as hell, but then again we can already achieve all of this through VP9 12bit.
>MODS (who got control) add AV1
No excuses now MODS, add fucking AV1 support to LULZ.
There fixed. >people start posting high quality AV1 clips at 1080p 60
That's a good thing. >VP8 homosexuals that didn't change to VP9 yet get confused as fuck as to how people are posting such high quality clips
Add AV1 and blacklist VP8. >Meanwhile a bunch of other fags will scream that they can't play the file
Like you said, already happens with VP9 10 and 12-bit, I do it on purpose to fuck with phonefags.
>That's a good thing.
I mean, I agree, that's why I said it. >and blacklist VP8.
I'm torn between a decision like that, mostly cuz of legacy content. At that point you might as well blacklist gif and png to save on space, only allowing VP9/AV1 and jpgs.
In a perfect world everyone would simply give a shit about optimizing their files a little bit, but that's sadly too much to ask for a website full of normie shit posters. >I do it on purpose to fuck with phonefags.
Based 12bit poster
>vp8 homosexuals start to re-encode their webms to vp9 making them look even worse than before
Not your problem really, just make quality webm and make them jealous.
The idea of blacklisting VP8 is to avoid new encodes with it.
Or just crap out a new FAQ page submission that tells users what boards support what files and features. Sticky a link to it for a month at the top of every page.
But that would require straightforward thinking instead of the schizo mess that is LULZ management.
probably satire but in case it isn't:
that would like bankrupt the site due to licensing costs >h265
most browsers support it now so technically possible... as long as you have a gpu capable of decoding it (software decoding isn't supported in any browser I think due to again patents n shit) >h266
0 browser support, 0 hardware support, shit barely exists, only one encoder that like takes a week to encode 10 seconds of videos
maybe in 10 years it might become an actual functioning codec (still ruined by patent bullshit doe and will probably get its ass woopped by av2)
>266
bloated dog shit that doesn't fucking work AND ISNT EVEN SUPPORTED BY FFMPEG MUCH LESS ANY BROWSER OUT THERE
you dumb fucking KEK
265 isnt much better on browser support either >b-but cuckfox and chrome!!
anyone ever check out AOM vs SVT and see the quality difference at similar speeds?
not sure if SVT is just a speed optimized version, but similar quality once you pair up similar speed presets
I know that SVT has a lot better MT, but that wasn't my question, since that's obvious.
I was just curious if AOM is maybe better in a way once you get similar encoding speeds on both ends going. Only ever played around with SVT, so I dunno if AOM is any usable in faster presets now days than a few years ago when I tried it. >AOM has the benefit of diverse tuning algorithms
That's what I'm curious about. >they are not that different.
I remember trying SVT-VP9 1-2 years ago, and it was VERY disappointing, hence my entire question. While it can be faster, it's also a lot worse quality no matter what somehow, while resulting in bigger files. But that isn't even at 1.0, never will at this rate, so there is that.
>I was just curious if AOM is maybe better in a way once you get similar encoding speeds on both ends going
No, that was kind of what I was trying to imply.
AOM only beats SVT apples-to-apples when only controlling for slowest presets, which SVT has no answer to in terms of matching speed.. You can only do that when cpu-used 1 or higher depending on the CPU.
>I remember trying SVT-VP9 1-2 years ago, and it was VERY disappointing, hence my entire question
It has improved a whole lot. I did
https://files.catbox.moe/amgs1i.webm
using the slowest preset, and it didn't take unbearably long.
>No, that was kind of what I was trying to imply.
Ah, alright, just wanted to make sure. Thanks for the info in that case, I was wondering about this stuff for quite a while! Gonna keep using SVT-AV1 in peace as usual then. >It has improved a whole lot
So It's worth it compiling FFmpeg with SVT-VP9 finally!? While I'm fine simply using VP9 as I've been so far, a little speed bump through SVT would be VERY much appreciated.
>comparing a codec from like 10 years ago with the best of the best that's available today with still 0 support
that's like saying that h264/h265/vp9 and every other codec is complete garbage because av1 is better
this really doesn't answer the question "why do you hate webp" like at all
I never said webp is the best image codec you fucking retard
It's incredible how 90% of the time I spend on LULZ is me trying to explain to autists like you what the fuck I just wrote because you fucking naggers can't comprehend literally 4 words
go back to kindergarten
>that's like saying that h264/h265/vp9 and every other codec is complete garbage because av1 is better
actually no
that's more like saying that av1 also is a pile of shit because h266 is better
shut up loser, av1 is king, vp8 is trash, vp9 is slow as shit, 264 will never be supported and 265 will forever be stuck in patent hell alongside 266.
YOU DUMB TRANNY nagger!
>av1 is king
never said it isn't >vp9 is slow as shit
never said it isn't >264 will never be supported
????
literally the most used video codec out there, what the fuck do you mean will never be supported >265 will forever be stuck in patent hell alongside 266
that doesn't change the fact that it's still a good codec if you ignore the defects, just lik webp is a bad codec if you ignore it's strengths >YOU DUMB TRANNY nagger!
alright
almost like its all gimmicky bullshit that NO ONE BUT HARDCORE NERDS AND ARCHIVISTS GIVE A SHIT ABOUT
and they wonder why everyone supported webp instead, and keep telling them that it's better than jpg and png
these dumb naggers refuse to look over the fucking hill, to see what else is out there and how other people think about shit
It is likely to be both extension and reduction (i.e. some AV1 features are to be dicontinued in AV2) unless the alliance decides to keep the backward compatibility.
what happened?
Apple added AV1 hardware decoder on iPhone 15.
...and encoder right?
No. iDevices will only produce MPEG LA-approved formats, but youtube is too big to ignore with AV1.
These fuckers are literally part of AoM come on Apple
they should be kicked out
no idea what the fuck they doing there
>In January 2018 the alliance's website was quietly updated to add Apple as a governing member of the alliance.
>October 1, 2019, Tencent joined as a governing member.
it's over
>Tencent was added
What the fuck for??
Isn't Apple huge on 444 color and the like? Does AV1 even support that?
Yeah.
not on the main profile
>High/Professional only
At least it supports it at all, so there is that. But I guess that isn't enough for Apple just yet.
Then again, NV/AMD still only support AV1 8bit 420 encoding, so there is that.
nvenc does 10bit and is decent, amd idk but is trash
Wait, shit, you're right. I meant to say NVENC AV1 doesn't support 444, only 420 at 8bit or 10 bit.
>amd idk but is trash
Funny enough I heard that their AV1 is pretty decent, but their system is also muddled as fuck.
Their AV1 works on a completely different chip, separate from their AVC and HEVC encoding, cuz they got AV1 from a company they bought it.
On top of that their professional GPUs got a different (way better) AV1 chip than consumer GPUs got.
15 pro*
no av1 on the regular 15 as it uses last year's chip
as always, itoddlers blown the fuck out
So another year until all the latest models support it, and add on another year for user adoption/upgrade, then add another or two for Hiro time.
Still better than nothing, if it ever happens. VP9 is a GIGANTIC upgrade over VP8, when even 264 would've been a huge upgrade.
AV1 is another upgrade over VP9, while also having huge speed implications thanks to SVT.
TLDR; Everything is better than VP8.
Ohhh, my bad, shoulda re-read what you said.
>It has VP9 for everything except regular 1080p
That is.. just why? Feels like a odd bug in their system or some shit, or them forcefully only using AV1 to test something, or whatever other cope I can think of.
>Still better than nothing, if it ever happens. VP9 is a GIGANTIC upgrade over VP8
maybe you didn't know but, LULZ already supports vp9 webms, it's just that 99% of users are retarded naggers that still use vp8/vorbis for """MUH compatibility""""" as always
>Feels like a odd bug in their system
It is
>or them forcefully only using AV1 to test something
nah, that doesn't make sense
>maybe you didn't know
I'm fully aware of that since day one, my point is that VP9 is slow as fuck, except if you like dog shit quality.
>or """MUH compatibility"""""
Meanwhile I encode my stuff in 12bit just to spite toddlers and everything else
>nah, that doesn't make sense
True, but I would've accepted that as a weird ass excuse. A lot of the time I don't trust google in making smart decisions.
>my point is that VP9 is slow as fuck
It really is, but most webms here are 30 second 340p stuff, is everyone here rocking Q6600's or something? like come on just wait for a few minutes for fuck's sake, vp8 is literally unwatchable
also we don't need 320 kbps vorbis audio for your 50 kbps vp8 video thanks (i really do see shit like this sometimes)
>Meanwhile I encode my stuff in 12bit just to spite toddlers and everything else
nah don't do that anon, I also phonepost sometimes 🙁 now I know whose webms fail to load on my pixel 4a, fuk u
>vp8 is literally unwatchable
also we don't need 320 kbps vorbis audio for your 50 kbps vp8 video thanks (i really do see shit like this sometimes)
I fucking hate that shit like you have no idea. Meanwhile I try to optimize my webm's to a degree, making the audio 64kb opus for fast downloading, and crf 30-50 for the video.
I bet the majority of people are still using CBR cuz they can't be asked to encode things multiple times for it to be efficient, wasting bits on scenes that don't fucking need it.
>nah don't do that anon
I WILL CONTINUE TAKING A SHIT ON PHONES FAGS AND YOU CAN'T STOP ME
>I WILL CONTINUE TAKING A SHIT ON PHONES FAGS AND YOU CAN'T STOP ME
fine 🙁
btw (same nagger as the previous reply) I never made any webms for LULZ and I had actually thought LULZ had a maximum webm resolution of 720p
So you are telling me that it's just an encoding skill issue???
Jesus christ
>max res of 720p
last time I checked the maximum was 1080p, which shouldn't be used for anything but short and simple clips like what I post, otherwise use whatever res gets you under 4mb.
That you should use vp9 by default is a given, without discussion. VP8 is trash, always was, always will be. Literally worse than 264, in every possible way.
>you telling me it's just a skill issue?
yes, always has been.
very cool, thanks anon
No prob, glad to be of use.
>VP8 is trash, always was, always will be
This. vp8 is so fucking shit that your video turns B&W when the bitrate isn't high enough. Posting vp8 webms should be a bannable offense
It blows my mind whenever I find a VP8 file in my reaction folder, esp (new type) sound ones which appeared AFTER VP9 became a thing.
so av1 webms in 2026?
nah sounds too optimistic, that nagger can't even add webp support and it's been a common format for like 5 years already
btw shit like this is why I fucking hate apple
iToddlers say "just don't buy apple products if you don't like it!"
but the reality is that this idiotic company is holding technology behind just by existing
we are talking about av1 here, but these fuckers don't even have vorbis/opus support yet on safari, which is why lots of music streaming sites still stream mp3 (such as bandcamp or soundcloud).
Spotify (which normally uses vorbis) even had to transcode their entire library to aac for the web player just for itoddlers
we are stuck in 1990 just because they can't get onboard with this alien 2010 technology
fuck webp and fuck you
>hates webp
>no arguments
classic
and no, the fact your cracked photoshop from 2005 doesn't support the format isn't a good reason to shit on webp
>worse at lossy compression than JPEG XL
>worse at lossy compression than Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder
>worse AND slower at lossless compression than JPEG XL
You want me to keep going? Lossy WebP is fucking VP8 keyframes. VP8. You know, the video codec limited to the original NTSC color gamut from the fucking 1950's?
>cjxl a PNG with a bunch of PNG tEXt, color profile, XMP, etc.
>djxl that JXL
>get the same fucking PNG out the other end
>cwebp the same PNG
>lol fuk ur metadata
It's shit. It needs to die. It needs to take HEIC and AVIF with it.
>JPEG XL
worthless bloated codec that will be dead next year cuz no one cares for it but LULZ cucks like you
Who's got no arguments now? Fkn moron.
already been adopted at a way faster rate than WebP and AVIF which are both way older. keep seething.
>You know, the video codec limited to the original NTSC color gamut from the fucking 1950's?
It's not like VP9 or AV1 even improved much on that. Unless you are doing HDR, it's still gonna be the flawed BT 709 matrix coefficients from the fucking 90's.
Wait, really? I'm able to properly use both BT.709 and BT.2020 with VP9 and AV1. Chromium based browsers will also (poorly) tonemap BT.2020 HDR VP9 when viewed on an 8-bit display. The issue with VP8 is that it treats everything as BT.601...
>The issue with VP8 is that it treats everything as TV content
>Not the fact that it's compression is complete and utter dog shit even compared to 264
kek I thought that much was implied anon. The fucked up colors no matter how many bits you throw at it are just the icing on the shitcake that is VP8
>>The issue with VP8 is that it treats everything as TV content
VP8 converts BT709 Colormatrix videos to BT601, it is a limitation of the codec.
BT 2020, the gamut of HDR, but yes.
The issue is with traditional SDR. BT 709 matrix coefficients encode luma, not luminance. That distinction matters.
> worse at lossy compression than JPEG XL
Nevertheless WebP would be a step forward for LULZ because (as you can guess it) using JPEG XL is not an option on LULZ
>worse at lossy compression than Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder
Nobody cares because Google's own fucking Guetzli JPEG encoder needs Google's own fucking JPEG decoder (knusperli) to look good, and at this point you'd better design Google's own fucking new format (and that's what they did)
You'd better compare WebP with the other Google's own fucking JPEG encoder (jpegli)
> cwebp the same PNG
> lol fuk ur metadata
You could use “cwebp -metadata icc” to keep your PNG's color profile, for example. (There are some other CLI options.)
> It needs to die. It needs to take HEIC and AVIF with it.
What do you even have against HEIC and AVIF.
For the first time in history we have an opportunity of saving any keyframe from any AV1 video to an AVIF file without losing its quality (JPEG would introduce such losses) and without greatly inflating its filesize (PNG would be lossless at much greater size).
Same with HEVC (H.265) keyframes in HEIC files.
Also animated AVIF files have all the tools of true cinematic compression and thus in terms of colourspaces and bitrates they're literally the next step of evolution (where the first step was a multitude of huge GIF files with 256 colours per frame and the second step was an unseen multitude of significantly smaller animated WebP files with TrueColor frames, there the third step brings us even smaller animated AVIF files with vibrant 30-bit pixels and awesome bitrates).
jesus christ stop it with the insane spacing on such a worthless post
>Nevertheless WebP would be a step forward
lol
lmao, even
ilook at all this bloaty bullshit that means jack shit without a proper source
https://siipo.la/blog/is-webp-really-better-than-jpeg
> testing cwebp without “-sharp_yuv”
ngmi
>fancy pants jpeg
>fancy pants jpeg
>average joe webp
>average joe avif
nagger, no one fucking uses these special type of jpgs, only autistic naggers like you do, so the point of webp being better still fucking stands you negro dick sucking fag.
>no one fucking uses these special type of jpgs
Skill issue.
cjpeg and mozjpeg are just JPEG encoders, like Google's Guetzli + JPEG thing. The files that come out the other fucking end are regular JPEGs, just smaller/better quality than what you'd get out of a regular compressor. WEBP isn't better than fucking anything. Don't you have more dick to suck, James?
>I'm not joking when I say the reason JXL was cockblocked by Chromium might actually be due to internal office politics at Google. We already know Google has used JXL or JXL-related technologies on some other projects and Google technology and engineers were involved in JXL's creation.
>The commit to remove JXL support was authored by Google employee James Zern.
>https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4081749
>I wonder who authored WebP?
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zern-webp/
>Authors: James Zern, Pascal Massimino, Jyrki Alakuijala
>I wonder who the primary contributor to libwebp is?
>https://chromium.googlesource.com/webm/libwebp/+log
>Weird, it's overwhelmingly James Zern.
>What do you even have against HEIC and AVIF.
INTERFRAME VIDEO CODECS SHOULDN'T BE USED AS IMAGE CODECS. FULL STOP.
They weren't fucking designed with that in mind, nor were they optimized for it. They aren't fucking efficient at it. They exist to store keyframes AND b-frames/p-frames.
>For the first time in history we have an opportunity of saving any keyframe from any AV1 video to an AVIF file without losing its quality
Literally who gives a fuck? Just take a screenshot you retard. Assuming the scene detection algorithm placed a keyframe exactly where you want to make a cap in the firstplace (SPOILER ALERT: IT DID NOT).
>Also animated AVIF files
You mean, VIDEOS?
>open GIF
>decodes on a fucking potato from 1995
>open AVIF
>phone explodes
lmao. I'd take proper APNG support over AVIF.
That's right.
Hiromoot? Where you at?
iOS is getting hardware AV1 support now. It's time to add AV1 support to LULZ.
we don't even have webp (don't hit me!)
>iphone 15
>1000 dollar phone
can't even play despacito in 1080p without paying for yt premium because of the lack of av1 decoding
no but seriously guys did nobody notice this? the vp9 1080p encode of despacito has been missing for like 3 months on youtube and now you have to pay to watch it at 1080 on devices without av1 support
like someone could use this to get 90k upvotes on reddit by saying they are locking 1080p behind a paywall even though it's a mistake, I'm blessing all of you with this knowledge
>this one video that doesn't have VP9 (for whatever reason) can't be played in high quality
that literally isn't relevant for 90% of YT
yes I know
It's a joke that's the point
but I also find it funny how nobody notices this like shit's one of the most watched videos on the platforms and it's also the only one to have such weird bug that's so easy to spot
Fair enough, my bad then. I will agree tho, it's weird that a "beloved" often watched video like that wouldn't support VP9 as a baseline, instead only having 264 and AV1.
but it does support vp9
it's just missing for regular 1080p, which is something I've never seen before, normally every video has the same codecs for every resolution
also they could use h264 as a fall-back but they don't idk why, on web it does fall back to h264 if you have av1 decoding disabled
My iPhone 13 Pro plays 1080p Premium videos, wtf are you talking about
>can't read
classic iToddler
>can't even play despacito in 1080p without paying for yt premium because of the lack of av1 decoding
>no but seriously guys did nobody notice this? the vp9 1080p encode of despacito has been missing for like 3 months on youtube and now you have to pay to watch it at 1080 on devices without av1 support
I just downloaded this video with yt-dlp:
And it is FHD with VP9.
Seems more likely a yt bug.
>coomer being so fucking brain fried that he can't tell AI apart from reality anymore
lmao
>I-IS THAT A VP8 WEBM? AAAAAAH HELP ME
autism
whatever, enjoy your 4 pixels
No excuses now Hiro, add fucking AV1 support to LULZ.
>MODS (who got control) add AV1
>people start posting high quality AV1 clips at 1080p 60
>VP8 homosexuals that didn't change to VP9 yet get confused as fuck as to how people are posting such high quality clips
>Meanwhile a bunch of other fags will scream that they can't play the file
Would be funny as hell, but then again we can already achieve all of this through VP9 12bit.
>MODS (who got control) add AV1
No excuses now MODS, add fucking AV1 support to LULZ.
There fixed.
>people start posting high quality AV1 clips at 1080p 60
That's a good thing.
>VP8 homosexuals that didn't change to VP9 yet get confused as fuck as to how people are posting such high quality clips
Add AV1 and blacklist VP8.
>Meanwhile a bunch of other fags will scream that they can't play the file
Like you said, already happens with VP9 10 and 12-bit, I do it on purpose to fuck with phonefags.
>That's a good thing.
I mean, I agree, that's why I said it.
>and blacklist VP8.
I'm torn between a decision like that, mostly cuz of legacy content. At that point you might as well blacklist gif and png to save on space, only allowing VP9/AV1 and jpgs.
In a perfect world everyone would simply give a shit about optimizing their files a little bit, but that's sadly too much to ask for a website full of normie shit posters.
>I do it on purpose to fuck with phonefags.
Based 12bit poster
>Add av1 and blacklist vp8
>vp8 homosexuals start to re-encode their webms to vp9 making them look even worse than before
>vp8 homosexuals start to re-encode their webms to vp9 making them look even worse than before
Not your problem really, just make quality webm and make them jealous.
The idea of blacklisting VP8 is to avoid new encodes with it.
Or just crap out a new FAQ page submission that tells users what boards support what files and features. Sticky a link to it for a month at the top of every page.
But that would require straightforward thinking instead of the schizo mess that is LULZ management.
According to MDN, Safari already supports AV1 on webm so yeah, no excuses:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Media/Formats/Containers#webm
shout out to my av1bros, stay litty
Blacklist all Google homosexualry and add H265 and H266
probably satire but in case it isn't:
that would like bankrupt the site due to licensing costs
>h265
most browsers support it now so technically possible... as long as you have a gpu capable of decoding it (software decoding isn't supported in any browser I think due to again patents n shit)
>h266
0 browser support, 0 hardware support, shit barely exists, only one encoder that like takes a week to encode 10 seconds of videos
maybe in 10 years it might become an actual functioning codec (still ruined by patent bullshit doe and will probably get its ass woopped by av2)
>266
bloated dog shit that doesn't fucking work AND ISNT EVEN SUPPORTED BY FFMPEG MUCH LESS ANY BROWSER OUT THERE
you dumb fucking KEK
265 isnt much better on browser support either
>b-but cuckfox and chrome!!
Post AV1 WebM's that would fit LULZ size constraints.
>minetranny trash
>tranime with HYPER HOMO music and 24 fps ai slop dog shit
lol what a waste of 4mb and my fucking time
Are the trannies in the room with us right now?
3 minutes of “Toradora!” (the cookies scene) in 5 megabytes
finally, a good show. no trannies here, instead we got reddit spacing.
Epoch Rising's “Choose Your Path Western Man” in six megabytes
Source: https://youtu.be/kGwvCrwHz84
>schizo wojak homosexualry
>six mb instead of the needed 4
>reddit spacing
what a terrible fucking post, jesus christ
>>six mb instead of the needed 4
nta but you can post up to 6 on /wsg/ anon...
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/09/apple-unveils-iphone-15-pro-and-iphone-15-pro-max/
A17 Pro includes a dedicated AV1 decoder, enabling more efficient, high-quality video experiences for streaming services.
AV1 WON
MPEG SHILLS BTFO
@95968320
Damn, everything is trannies, some internal conflict going on anon.
shut up nagger homosexual
anyone ever check out AOM vs SVT and see the quality difference at similar speeds?
not sure if SVT is just a speed optimized version, but similar quality once you pair up similar speed presets
SVT has much better multithreading. Once you eliminate that factor, they are not that different.
AOM has the benefit of diverse tuning algorithms
I know that SVT has a lot better MT, but that wasn't my question, since that's obvious.
I was just curious if AOM is maybe better in a way once you get similar encoding speeds on both ends going. Only ever played around with SVT, so I dunno if AOM is any usable in faster presets now days than a few years ago when I tried it.
>AOM has the benefit of diverse tuning algorithms
That's what I'm curious about.
>they are not that different.
I remember trying SVT-VP9 1-2 years ago, and it was VERY disappointing, hence my entire question. While it can be faster, it's also a lot worse quality no matter what somehow, while resulting in bigger files. But that isn't even at 1.0, never will at this rate, so there is that.
>I was just curious if AOM is maybe better in a way once you get similar encoding speeds on both ends going
No, that was kind of what I was trying to imply.
AOM only beats SVT apples-to-apples when only controlling for slowest presets, which SVT has no answer to in terms of matching speed.. You can only do that when cpu-used 1 or higher depending on the CPU.
>I remember trying SVT-VP9 1-2 years ago, and it was VERY disappointing, hence my entire question
It has improved a whole lot. I did
using the slowest preset, and it didn't take unbearably long.
>No, that was kind of what I was trying to imply.
Ah, alright, just wanted to make sure. Thanks for the info in that case, I was wondering about this stuff for quite a while! Gonna keep using SVT-AV1 in peace as usual then.
>It has improved a whole lot
So It's worth it compiling FFmpeg with SVT-VP9 finally!? While I'm fine simply using VP9 as I've been so far, a little speed bump through SVT would be VERY much appreciated.
What I meant is that SVT-AV1 is much better than SVT-VP9 ever got, and also compared to itself in the beta. SVT-VP9 is probably still dogshit.
SVT preset 0 is 10 times faster than AOM preset 0, just use SVT
Not what I asked, anon.
SVT-VP9 was abandoned to focus all dev efforts into AV1.
That's what I thought, explaining why SVT-VP9 is still in such a shit taste.
>SVT-AV1 is much better than SVT-VP9 ever got
I mean yeah, that much is obvious.
https://media.xiph.org/video/derf/
Why have the downloads become so slow? I want to use a control for testing encoding speed.
I usually just use random recordings I make, but that is one hell of a source for clips to use right there
>le apple devices
eh call me when real news happens
>literally holds back EVERYTHING in the world cuz they don't support it
this is your brain on cuckdroid
i've never owned an android device in my life, can you tell i'm really sick of apple yet?
Qualcomm and all major PC GPU vendors support it now.
nice, i'm on the lookout for a gpu this is good info thanks
>comparing a codec from like 10 years ago with the best of the best that's available today with still 0 support
that's like saying that h264/h265/vp9 and every other codec is complete garbage because av1 is better
this really doesn't answer the question "why do you hate webp" like at all
I never said webp is the best image codec you fucking retard
It's incredible how 90% of the time I spend on LULZ is me trying to explain to autists like you what the fuck I just wrote because you fucking naggers can't comprehend literally 4 words
go back to kindergarten
>that's like saying that h264/h265/vp9 and every other codec is complete garbage because av1 is better
actually no
that's more like saying that av1 also is a pile of shit because h266 is better
shut up loser, av1 is king, vp8 is trash, vp9 is slow as shit, 264 will never be supported and 265 will forever be stuck in patent hell alongside 266.
YOU DUMB TRANNY nagger!
>av1 is king
never said it isn't
>vp9 is slow as shit
never said it isn't
>264 will never be supported
????
literally the most used video codec out there, what the fuck do you mean will never be supported
>265 will forever be stuck in patent hell alongside 266
that doesn't change the fact that it's still a good codec if you ignore the defects, just lik webp is a bad codec if you ignore it's strengths
>YOU DUMB TRANNY nagger!
alright
Shame browsers never integrated support for decoding arithmetic coded jpegs.
almost like its all gimmicky bullshit that NO ONE BUT HARDCORE NERDS AND ARCHIVISTS GIVE A SHIT ABOUT
and they wonder why everyone supported webp instead, and keep telling them that it's better than jpg and png
these dumb naggers refuse to look over the fucking hill, to see what else is out there and how other people think about shit
It is true that av2 will be an extension of AV1?
It is likely to be both extension and reduction (i.e. some AV1 features are to be dicontinued in AV2) unless the alliance decides to keep the backward compatibility.
Couldn't they do a reduction keeping the backwards compatibility?
But then what happens if an AV2 video player has to encounter a discarded AV1 feature in some AV1 video stream?
A backwards incompatibility happens.