Talk:MPEG-4 Part 2

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Electronics Low‑importance

	Electronics portal This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk pageElectronicsWikipedia:WikiProject ElectronicsTemplate:WikiProject Electronicselectronic articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Media Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Media To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Mackay Radio
Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite
NPOV : Content (media and publishing)
Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper
Other :
- Answer requests for comments

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

There seems to be a lot of factual errors in the article. This article is best written by someone who knows the intricacies of video coding. I would do it, if no one else does withing the next one month. I just want to make sure, someone more capable than me take a jab at it.

Great, may I suggest the first error to correct is the WTF-inducing stuff about qpel. It states:

The quarter-sample motion compensation feature of ASP was innovative, and was later also included (in somewhat different forms) in MPEG-4 Part 10 and VC-1. It is considered the most beneficial innovative feature of ASP.

Innovative? Uh, questionable. Beneficial? Who makes this stuff up? Note to whomever wrote this originally: please quit writing sweeping statements ("most beneficial and innovative"?!) about topics you're ignorant of.

ASP's qpel places large demands on the decoder, and in exchange for this, you usually get no improvement in quality at all. It frequently reduces quality. While the idea was kept (and indeed made mandatory) in H.264, its qpel works differently; in particular it doesn't cause such a large speed hit. Snacky 21:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although less-mentioned, a wavelet-based still image codec is also a part of ISO 14496-2. One can quote it from a place with little copyright trouble. turanyuksel 09:17, 09 April 206 (EET DST)

work in progress.

I have started editing this page to correct and enhance the contents. The person who did the entry on H.264 could do a better job here, and so, please feel free to edit the entire content if you see this. thanks... Else I will go through a multi stage edit and make sure the content is good, by the end of the month.

Profiles

According to http://www.mpegla.com/m4v/m4v-faq.cfm

“

current MPEG-4 Visual Standard profiles... are simple, core, main, simple scalable, N-bit, basic animated texture, scalable texture, simple FA, advanced real time simple, core scalable, advanced coding efficiency, advanced core, advanced scalable texture, simple FBA, hybrid, advanced simple, fine granularity scalable, simple studio, and/or core studio profiles as defined in ISO/IEC 14496-2:2001 [Part 2 Visual dated 2001-12-01], 14496-2:2001/Amd.1:2002 [Studio profile dated 2002-02-01], or 14496-2:2001/Amd.2:2002 [Streaming video profile dated 2002-02-01].

”

harmful effect on speed ?

The article says "harmful effect on speed". As a codec has no moving parts, this is ambiguous. Is it the encoding speed ? Decoding speed ? Some other speed ? --Xerces8 (talk) 11:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticisms from users?

I think something in this page should include the reality that XviD is by far the most popular codec of video encoded for p2p transfer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.217.94.187 (talk) 12:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DivX: an implementation of MPEG-4 Part 2 or MPEG-4 Part 10?

This article states that Part 2 is used by DivX, while the main article for the DivX codec states that it uses Part 10 (actually, it states that it uses H.264: "The DivX codec uses lossy H.264 compression for video", but it is my understanding that H.264 is equivalent to MPEG-4 part 10: "H.264 is a standard for video compression, and is equivalent to MPEG-4 Part 10", taken from the article on H.264). Which is correct? Is DivX an implementation of MPEG-4 Part 2 or MPEG-4 Part 10? In either case there is at least one article that must be corrected, either the DivX one, or the MPEG-4 Part 2 one, or the H.264 one (stating that H.264 is equivalent to MPEG-4 Part 10).
As a counter-example, this article states that XviD is an implementation of Part 2, and, sure enough, the article on the XviD codec states the same. --ZeframCochrane (talk) 20:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The DivX article should be corrected. The DivX codec (in fact, DivX is not a codec, it is just a brand name of various products made by the DivX company—like the DivX Pro Codec, for example) implements both MPEG-4 Part 2 and (in the new version 7.x) also MPEG-4 Part 10, aka H.264. The DivX article introduction used to say that the DivX codec implements MPEG-4 video compression, which was correct, because the "MPEG-4" expression includes both Part 2 and Part 10, but it was recently changed to H.264, which is not good, because version 7 supports both (Part 2 support has not been removed, for obvious reasons, H.264 support is just an additional feature).—J. M. (talk) 23:19, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bad title ? Bad article ?

This article should be named "MPEG-4 Part 2 Video" since it is speaking about a specific part (the video) of the "Part 2". Indeed the parent (MPEG-4) says that there is still texture, synthetic image etc. Why should this article, while being more specific, lose its accuracy ? The implications of having lots of codec inside this standard is _very_ important: it is a mess, and it is one of the reason MPEG-4 failed. We should not simplifying MPEG-4 because it is not simple: it is a big over-complicated mess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.49.124.107 (talk) 16:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on MPEG-4 Part 2

Cyberbot II has detected links on MPEG-4 Part 2 which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://guru.multimedia.cx/?p=10
Triggered by \bguru\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:24, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MPEG-4 Part 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100420192552/http://mpeg.chiariglione.org/standards.htm to http://mpeg.chiariglione.org/standards.htm
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.m4if.org/resources/profiles/index.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:05, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on MPEG-4 Part 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:51, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]