Divx is dead, DGS is the future, maybe

[Czar]

http://www.cdfreaks.com/news2.php3?ID=2990



Defosse, a Belgian inventor has developed DGS (Defosse Digital System) a digital language that makes it possible to edit images,movies and music at such a way that it is possible to store it at a much more efficient way.

Defosse has demonstrated some of the possibilities to the newspaper and the newspaper was not able to see anything that could make the demonstration fake.

One of the things he demonstrated was zooming on to a picture, nowadays not possible to zoom in about 2000 times without having a very big quality loss, DGS is able to do this thousands of times without quality loss and the file is even just about 19 MB, Defosse says that it is even possible to bring this down to 500k.

He also demonstrated a DVD movie of which he has brought down the filesize to 30 MB, so you can fit 20 DVD movies on 1 CD-R !

He was also able to put a 8 minute movie of the WTC disaster on 1 single floppydisk just using Windows Media player. With an own DGS mediaplayer he would be able to put 30 minutes of full screen television on a floppy.


If anyone know where I could get my hands on this then please tell.

 

[LiQiCE]

This sounds like the compression technique that was floating around a few years ago that claimed you could compress an entire CD and fit it into a floppy disk. Sounds like BS to me.

 

[GL]

I could compress a 10GB MPEG-2 file down to 50kB if all it was, was a simple animation. Without any details of the source videos and the resulting "compressed" videos, I'm very skeptical. If this technology is legit, he likely used source material with loads and loads of redundant information so that his "compressor" would look much better than it actually was.

As an experiment, make a text file with hundreds of the same phrase - and only this phrase.

i.e. make it look like:

The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.
The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.
The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.
The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.
.
.
.

And see how well pkzip compresses the file (make the file as big as possible). Compare this to how well pkzip works on your typical file and you'll see that in the real world, things are substantially less compressible.

 

[yakko]

Sounds like a load to me.

 

[StageLeft]

He also demonstrated a DVD movie of which he has brought down the filesize to 30 MB, so you can fit 20 DVD movies on 1 CD-R !

What's that smell? Oh it's a big pile of bull sh*t.

 

[JACKHAMMER]

<< Oh it's a big pile of bull sh*t. >>



I thought it smelled in here

 

[notfred]

Of course, there's no codec or samples to download.

 

[Zwingle]

If you think that compression is not possible....download this file here and unzip the file to your desktop....the executable is 65kb. This video is more than 8 minutes long and has some mind blowing sound and graphics......truly amazing.....I was skeptical at first and thought maybe it was streaming from the internet.....nope.....it says at the end of the video, that they figured out a compression ratio of 30000 to 1....that means that 65kb file is actually ?10GB? of data that is uncompressed on the fly. You must have DX8 installed and have a fairly decent vid card....here is a link to the site if you want to see more of the stuff they have done or want more info.....

 

[notfred]

<< If you think that compression is not possible....download this file here and unzip the file to your desktop....the executable is 65kb. This video is more than 8 minutes long and has some mind blowing sound and graphics......truly amazing.....I was skeptical at first and thought maybe it was streaming from the internet.....nope.....it says at the end of the video, that they figured out a compression ratio of 30000 to 1....that means that 65kb file is actually 10GB of data that is uncompressed on the fly. You must have DX8 installed and have a fairly decent vid card....here is a link to the site if you want to see more of the stuff they have done or want more info..... >>



um, if you're going to measure like that, then any 3d game has infinite compression, because if you play enough, it will generate an infinite amount of image data, all coming from a 700mb CD.

 

[Sugadaddy]

<< If you think that compression is not possible....download this file here and unzip the file to your desktop....the executable is 65kb. This video is more than 8 minutes long and has some mind blowing sound and graphics......truly amazing.....I was skeptical at first and thought maybe it was streaming from the internet.....nope.....it says at the end of the video, that they figured out a compression ratio of 30000 to 1....that means that 65kb file is actually ?10GB? of data that is uncompressed on the fly. You must have DX8 installed and have a fairly decent vid card....here is a link to the site if you want to see more of the stuff they have done or want more info..... >>




If it's what I'm thinking about, then you need directX 8 because it uses the textures already stored on your computer. The little thing you download doesn't have its own textures (and probably sound too), it just uses DirectX's, that's why it can be so small.

 

[Nefrodite]

yup thats 3d rendering not video.

 

[Zwingle]

I agree....but that is a 700 MB file.....this is 65kb and look what he has done. Think about how many movies can be put on a cd if he can get this to fruition. Imagine if we can get this compression on our pc.....where the data is uncompressed this fast on the fly? The software we install can stay compressed until we need it....saving GB of space. Do you think MS or Maxtor or WD will let this come to market? Wanna back up you whole PC on 1 CD....no problem!

Nefrodite - check out the other stuff on the site....he actually has a movie that morphs....the data is in the executable....not your system....watch the whole thing....it is all explained in the end.
You guys are just too skeptical.......I bet you think that we never went to the moon either....I don't!

 

[GL]

Zwingle,

DVD movies are more akin to animated bitmapped images. What the download you have provided is more akin to animated vector images. I've drawn the comparison because vector images can be scaled infinitely without loss of quality whereas bitmapped images cannot. Vector images are also much smaller than their bitmap counterparts. However, they have their drawbacks. Without getting too complicated, yes you're correct - it would be possible to put to 3d render a movie. However, you would need a substantial amount of information that is lacking in the contents of a DVD in order to do so.

Keep in mind also that the size of the compressed file itself is important - but the size of the compressor/decompressor is also important. I could put a DVD in a file the size of 1 kB if the compressor/decompressor was about 50GB in size. I'm not certain of this, but I believe the file you linked to utilizes a lot of resources that are already on the computer - taking into consideration the sizes of these resources, the total size would probably be much higher.

 

[Looney]

You guys are just too skeptical.......I bet you think that we never went to the moon either....I don't!

Or maybe you're too gullible? You're the one that's claiming that companies like MS or Maxtor will conspire against this technology coming out.

 

[Aelus]

the article comes from a newspaper i know, it's not the most strict one, but not too bad either.

i don't know if it's true or not, but here are some quotes directly from the article (personal translations)

he showed a graphic file to the journalists, sized 19mb, and was able to enlarge it 2000x without serious quality loss.

he also showed an entire dvd movie which was sized 30mb.

some info about the guy: he's 47 years old, fascinated by computers, and a music composer (acid techno), and he sais he develloped a system (he specifically stated it wasn't a compression technique) to transfer data, sound and images on a more efficient way.

his boss also states that apparently there's lots of interest in his work.

take it for what it is, just giving a little more info directly from the article.

Aelus

 

[StageLeft]

Here is the link from fark Fark's linky

The reason I don't believe a dvd can be compressed to 30 megs is that regardless of compression no level of magic can eliminate certain necessities. A movie of 90 minutes in length has 129,000 frames (90 min X 60 sec X 24 FPS). Even though compression is used with MPEG to eliminate having to spit out every frame as a totally new one (like an .avi which is just running .bmps in order), frames are adequately different and possess a different enough appearance that compressing 130,000 frames PLUS high quality sound into 30,000,000 bytes is just totally inconceivable. As mentioned below only with some funky rendering could it happen and that isn't how movies are.

30 megs gives 230 bytes per frame. In 230 bytes you can't have a DVD quality picture (even if with compression you're only changing part of that frame over the last one) along with high quality sound. There simply isn't enough data there to do it.

 

[cuteybunny]

i think wmv/asf both sucked horribly compared to divx. microsoft's trump card

 

[MrCodeDude]

If this turns out to be true, then yay for me
-- mrcodedude

 

[LethalWolfe]

Skoorb, close, but not quite. Your math should be 90 min X 60 sec X 30 FPS. The only time film is seen at 24FPS is when it's projected. Everything you see on TV is 30FPS (well, 29.97 technically).


Lethal

 

[gogeeta13]

<< Skoorb, close, but not quite. Your math should be 90 min X 60 sec X 30 FPS. The only time film is seen at 24FPS is when it's projected. Everything you see on TV is 30FPS (well, 29.97 technically).


Lethal >>



actually 29.970, 5 significant digits

 

[crypticlogin]

If all he did was show a graphic file to the newspaper reporters, then I'm going out on a limb to guess he implemented his own version of a wavelet-based image compression format. I don't know where the hell it is right now but JPEG2000, the successor to JPEG, was supposed to be a fairly significant step in that you can zoom in a decent clip and still have a good, unpixelated representation. JPEG2000 is/was wavelet-based as well. Where art thou?

As for the 30Mb DVD... I'm really skeptical of that. Really, really, skeptical...

 

[cherrytwist]

Everybody knows the real definition of DGS is:

Diminished Glute Syndrome

 

[ShadowFox]

All of this discussion is really moot anyway, with the ever growing size of hard drives and DVD burners getting cheaper we will have plenty of room for current compression techniques. Also, he showed this to a bunch of JOURNALISTS! How the hell can they tell if it was a fake!

 

[Imaginer]

It might be possible to make a DVD movie into 30MB if there is the use of vectors and with every animation the file has information as to which vectors be moved creating something of an animation.

However, making a frame per frame movie into a vector format would be difficult.

 

[MrBond]

<< actually 29.970, 5 significant digits >>

Argghhh!!! Significant Figures! Ahhhhhhhh!! *Runs into wall*

(Can you tell I'm burnt out on my engineering cirriculum?)

As far as not needing new compressions standards, I kind of disagree there. Fixed media may be getting larger, but portable media is not. It'd sure be nice to be able to take a large video of a plant walk-through, for example, and incorporate it into a power point presentation you'd show to potential customers. That kind of thing could rapidly get larger then a CDR at current compression rates.

Of course, the movie studios are going to have a FIT if this is real. Right now, downloading the latest hollywood blockbuster is out of my reach, because I'm stuck on a 56k modem (like the vast majority of the internet's users). But when you shrink that movie down to 30 or 40mb, it's quite possible (I don't even blink at a 30mb file, my connection is always on with my router). Movie piracy would reach the level of mp3 trading. It would not be pretty...