Question about quality vs quantizers. about cavif-rs

[kornelski]

No, I'm deliberately hiding the quantizer option.

• As far as I can tell min/max split didn't do anything for still images.

• The scale is not portable across AV1 encoders and the number doesn't mean anything that non-experts can relate to.

• The effect on visual quality is non-linear. My current implementation is wrong actually. I plan to align it better to approximate JPEG quality scale.

[bat999]

As far as I can tell min/max split didn't do anything for still images.
Yes, I can understand that. Thanks.

... I plan to align it better to approximate JPEG quality scale.
Both cjpeg and cwebp have default quality 75.
dssim thinks cavif Q 75 is too good. :-)

0.00164695	foo1_q75.jpg
0.00244810	foo1_q75.webp
0.00084624	foo1_q75.avif

0.00203879	foo2_q75.jpg
0.00256523	foo2_q75.webp
0.00082852	foo2_q75.avif

echo ""; \
cjpeg -quality 75 -outfile foo1_q75.jpg foo1.png; \
cwebp -q 75 -mt -m 6 -quiet foo1.png -o foo1_q75.webp; \
cavif -Q 75 -s 0 -j $(nproc) -q -o foo1_q75.avif foo1.png; \
dssim foo1.png foo1_q75.jpg foo1_q75.webp foo1_q75.avif; \
echo ""; \
cjpeg -quality 75 -outfile foo2_q75.jpg foo2.png; \
cwebp -q 75 -mt -m 6 -quiet foo2.png -o foo2_q75.webp; \
cavif -Q 75 -s 0 -j $(nproc) -q -o foo2_q75.avif foo2.png; \
dssim foo2.png foo2_q75.jpg foo2_q75.webp foo2_q75.avif