Talk:VC-1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Download 2 Removal of Proposed Merge Message 3 Merge 4 Interlacing indication in bitrate table? 5 Non-Microsoft Implementations 6 FFmpeg legality

[edit] Download

I think information about downloading the VC-1 codec should be included, I'm not sure if it only comes with WMP11, or you have to somehow download it by itself.

[edit] Removal of Proposed Merge Message

Due to the following:

• It has been 5+ months since the WMV HD/VC-1 merge was proposed
• There is no consensus on the proposal
• The articles have been substantially edited and extended
• Differences seem to be more easily identified when reading both articles

I propose that the message regarding the proposed merge be removed. Unless there is objection, I will do so in a few days.

- TJJFV 04:26, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Done

- TJJFV 14:35, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

Should WMV HD and VC-1 be merged? At the least, the two articles are not self consistent. The article WMV HD says it is now also called VC-1. The VC-1 article says Although VC-1 and WMV9 refer to the same codec technology, VC-1 is actually a superset of WMV9, containing more coding tools for interlaced video sequences than the original WMV9 codec, which concentrated on progressive encoding for computer displays. Wendell 20:56, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm against. WMV9 and WMV HD are subsets of subsets of VC-1. If anything, those should be moved to VC-1 and be made to redirect to VC-1.-- Roc Vallès^Talk|Hist - 07:50, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Disagree. These topics should absolutely NOT merge. VC-1 is a specification; WMV is an implementation. If you merge these two, then you might as well merge DivX and MPEG-4, right? If you don't understand the difference between WMV and VC-1, then please do some research and get your facts straight first.

I vote no.

If we merge the articles it will not be as easy to find info on this, IMO

Err... I'm under the impression that WMV HD and VC-1 are two names for the same thing? Obviously they should be merged...?

There's very little information here. I would definitely merge them with redirects, etc. HarrisX 00:35, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Agree. I'm pretty sure that VC-1 and WMV-HD are the same thing. On VC-1's article, it says that that is the name of an informal draft to the SMPTE. But now, even microsoft and other chip manufacturers are using the phrase VC-1. Sam916 18:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Disagree. I'm working for a chip manufacturer and we implemented VC-1 in hardware. VC-1 is now a SMPTE Video coding standard even though it was originaly introduced by Microsoft. WMV-HD is the implementation in Microsoft products for High Definition resolution. VC-1 allows different kind of profiles and resolution with specific algorithmic tools, not only for HD.

Disagree with the merge. VC1 is a video standard WMV-HD is a product. Techincally are not the same, the main difference (amoung others) is that WMV doesn't feature interlace mode as VC1 does...

Agree. VC-1 is the codec used in WMVHD. There should be sectioning for each of these. Merge them. Siddharthagandhi 14:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge them. Just another star in the night ^{T | @ | C} 05:22, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

No I disagree with the merge proposal. Again, VC-1 is an SMTPE standard, the WMV HD is a Microsoft product. TJJFV 04:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Disagree, and I changed my mind Now I disagree, and this is because WMV HD used the old deprecated codec, not the VC-1 standard. Siddharthagandhi 22:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Interlacing indication in bitrate table?

I think it might be nice to indicate which formats in the table are interlaced and which are progressive. Knowledgeable people might know that the i formats are interlaced and the p formats aren't, but they likely don't know it for NTSC-SD or other formats. - Flooey 17:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Non-Microsoft Implementations

The article only mentions ffmpeg as an implementation of VC-1 unconnected to Microsoft, and this also only in one line. Are there any other implementations worth mentioning, and how much information is available? Don Cuan 16:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes there are other implementations. For example MainConcept has an encoder and decoder SDK. Can be found here: http://www.mainconcept.com/site/developer-products-6/vc-1-sdk-7743/information-7752.html. And here another encoder that seems hardware based: http://www.compumodules.com/professional-video/professional-vc1-hd-encoder.shtml. There is also a reference VC-1 encoder and a few other companies have released encoders. That information must be really old.

Tandberg also has a hardware-based VC-1 encoder, though it's unclear whether it's based on any Microsoft code or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.140.97 (talk) 03:28, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FFmpeg legality

FFMpeg is not entirely legal. Patents prevent legal decoding and encoding of Windows Media Video. Should this not be mentioned? Currently reading the page, most users will think that they can do it for free without any backlash. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.67.98.193 (talk) 20:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Laws vary by jurisdiction. Patents do not directly prevent people from using a product, so I don't know what kind of backlash you are talking about. Daniel.Cardenas 22:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)