I know this is slightly out of topic, but since the author mentioned it, after seeing his presentation [1] on VP8 vs H264, I can't really agree with his conclusions.
WebM clearly outruns H264 on HD video. It doesn't lose color information and some image details due to compression, that can be seen quite easily on the HD video comparisons: the first one shows very different lighting, which can also be seen on the second, that is not to mention the "airbrushed" neck of the guy (and face, but not so noticeable).
How can one tell from side-by-side captures that aren't even the same frames and where it's not clearly stated whether or not they're even comparable bitrates?
From "How to cheat on video encoder comparisons"[1] the odd color is most likely caused by screwed up conversion settings, not a limitation of the codec.
I don't understand how "it's time to start looking at encoding for WebM" when it is also "time to start dropping support for IE6", and both browsers have comparable market share.
9 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 34.8 ms ] threadWebM clearly outruns H264 on HD video. It doesn't lose color information and some image details due to compression, that can be seen quite easily on the HD video comparisons: the first one shows very different lighting, which can also be seen on the second, that is not to mention the "airbrushed" neck of the guy (and face, but not so noticeable).
[1] http://www.streamingmedia.com/conferences/west2010/presentat...
[1] http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/archives/472