GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 727124
ssim: port to 1.0 on top of video aggregator base class
Last modified: 2017-10-12 18:49:17 UTC
For our purposes of quality assurance in GES, we want to have a working video stream comparator, in order to spot regressions and to ensure frame-accurate editing. SSIM fits the bill, but it is very difficult to port in a standard way. My approach for fixing it has thus been to extract a base class from videomixer, and only keep the relevant video measuring code in videomeasure_ssim.c itself. It works well, and thanks to the colorspace conversions capabilities in basemixer its usage is now much more straightforward. Additionnally, it will be relatively easy to make ssim compare n-streams in one pass instead of just two for now, and that will also be very useful performance-wise for us. Example usage is : gst-launch-1.0 -m videotestsrc num-buffers=30 ! ssim name=m ! videoconvert ! xvimagesink sync=false videotestsrc num-buffers=30 ! m. As a bonus it shows that usage of the smpte pattern in videotestsrc is not deterministic (Might not be very relevant though :) I have also ported videomixer to that base class and have been using it since multiple days, with no behaviour difference. In the future, I think having that base class would be useful, for example when comes the time of implementing a glmixer, but that's not critical. Patches follow.
Created attachment 273038 [details] [review] Implement a basemixer class
Created attachment 273039 [details] [review] Port videomeasure_ssim to the basemixer class
Looks like a BaseVideoMixer, not a BaseMixer.
I suppose this need to be ported to the aggregator now ?
Comment on attachment 273038 [details] [review] Implement a basemixer class Marking as obsolete, replaced by videoaggregator.
Comment on attachment 273039 [details] [review] Port videomeasure_ssim to the basemixer class Should be re-implemented on top of videoaggregator.
Should bug #703093 be marked as a duplicate of this one?
(In reply to Sebastian Dröge (slomo) from comment #7) > Should bug #703093 be marked as a duplicate of this one? Nope, there's some valid discussion over there, this one should be closed in favor of https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=751324 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 751324 ***