[MPlayer-users] Re: [POOL] Moderate some users (was: Re: [-] Re: divx 6)

[Rich Felker]

On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 02:28:28PM +0200, Matthias Wieser wrote:
> Am Samstag, 6. Mai 2006 20:19 schrieb Vladimir Mosgalin:
> > Hi Matthias Wieser!
> >
> >  On 2006.05.06 at 17:10:49 +0200, Matthias Wieser wrote next:
> > > > No, PSNR proves nothing, especially so close. Differences in the type
> > > > of motion comp (which gmc is) will make differences on this scale
> > > > without reflecting anything about quality. You'll need to use a
> > > > better metric or doubleblind viewing test to get any useful
> > > > information.
> > >
> > > I need nothing. You will need to prove your claims. I'f you can't it's
> > > your problem. I took a random video (with much panning) and surprise,
> > > surprise, GMC improved psnr nearly 0.1 dB. If you wan't to use a better
> > > metric or
> >
> > PSNR PROVES NOTHING.
> >
> > Now read this again as many times as you need to remember it.
> 
> Think about it's definition.
> 
> PSNR CAN PROVE MANY THINGS

If you want to be a fucking pedant, it proves exactly one thing: that
the mean of the squares of the pointwise error between the original
signal and the encoded one is lower/higher. This is absolutely all it
does. If you claim it "proves" anything else then perhaps you should
look up the definition of proof.

> "Now read this again as many times as you need to remember it."

I cite this as yet another example of you being an antagonistic,
arrogant asshole.

> Regarding image quality it's at least an indication.

I explained why it is not except in very limited cases. If your mind
is too small to grasp this then shut your mouth and go read some books
or run som experiments.

Rich