Category Archives: General

Further SMC Encoding Work

Sometimes, when I don’t feel like doing anything else, I look at that Apple SMC video encoder again.

8-bit Encoding
When I last worked on the encoder, I couldn’t get the 8-color mode working correctly, even though the similar 2- and 4-color modes were working fine. I chalked the problem up to the extreme weirdness in the packing method unique to the 8-color mode. Remarkably, I had that logic correct the first time around. The real problem turned out to be with the 8-color cache and it was due to the vagaries of 64-bit math in C. Bit shifting an unsigned 8-bit quantity implicitly results in a signed 32-bit quantity, or so I discovered.

Anyway, the 8-color encoding works correctly, thus shaving a few more bytes off the encoding size.

Encoding Scheme Oddities
The next step is to encode runs of data. This is where I noticed some algorithmic oddities in the scheme that I never really noticed before. There are 1-, 2-, 4-, 8-, and 16-color modes. Each mode allows encoding from 1-256 blocks of that same encoding. For example, the byte sequence:

  0x62 0x45

Specifies that the next 3 4×4 blocks are encoded with single-color mode (of byte 0x62, high nibble is encoding mode and low nibble is count-1 blocks) and the palette color to be used is 0x45. Further, opcode 0x70 is the same except the following byte allows for specifying more than 16 (i.e., up to 256) blocks shall be encoded in the same matter. In light of this repeat functionality being built into the rendering opcodes, I’m puzzled by the existence of the repeat block opcodes. There are opcodes to repeat the prior block up to 256 times, and there are opcodes to repeat the prior pair of blocks up to 256 times.

So my quandary is: What would the repeat opcodes be used for? I hacked the FFmpeg / Libav SMC decoder to output a histogram of which opcodes are used. The repeat pair opcodes are never seen. However, the single-repeat opcodes are used a few times.

Puzzle Solved?
I’m glad I wrote this post. Just as I was about to hit “Publish”, I think I figured it out. I haven’t mentioned the skip opcodes yet– there are opcodes that specify that 1-256 4×4 blocks are unchanged from the previous frame. Conceivably, a block could be unchanged from the previous frame and then repeated 1-256 times from there.

That’s something I hadn’t thought of up to this point for my proposed algorithm and will require a little more work.

Further reading

Basic Video Palette Conversion

How do you take a 24-bit RGB image and convert it to an 8-bit paletted image for the purpose of compression using a codec that requires 8-bit input images? Seems simple enough and that’s what I’m tackling in this post.

Ask FFmpeg/Libav To Do It
Ideally, FFmpeg / Libav should be able to handle this automatically. Indeed, FFmpeg used to be able to, at least at the time I wrote this post about ZMBV and was unhappy with FFmpeg’s default results. Somewhere along the line, FFmpeg and Libav lost the ability to do this. I suspect it got removed during some swscale refactoring.

Still, there’s no telling if the old system would have computed palettes correctly for QuickTime files.

Distance Approach
When I started writing my SMC video encoder, I needed to convert RGB (from PNG files) to PAL8 colorspace. The path of least resistance was to match the pixels in the input image to the default 256-color palette that QuickTime assumes (and is hardcoded into FFmpeg/Libav).

How to perform the matching? Find the palette entry that is closest to a given input pixel, where “closest” is the minimum distance as computed by the usual distance formula (square root of the sum of the squares of the diffs of all the components).



That means for each pixel in an image, check the pixel against 256 palette entries (early termination is possible if an acceptable threshold is met). As you might imagine, this can be a bit time-consuming. I wondered about a faster approach…

Lookup Table
Continue reading →

Ode to the Gravis Ultrasound

WARNING: This post is a bunch of nostalgia. Feel free to follow along if you recall the DOS days of the early-mid 1990s.

Also, if you’re interested in the Gravis Ultrasound Experience CD-ROM, you can download the compressed ISO image here (137 megabytes). This only contains the data track as a .ISO file. However, the Internet Archive hosts the disc in CUE/BIN format which includes all the data tracks.

I finally let go of my Gravis Ultrasound MAX sound card a little while ago. It felt like the end of an era for me, even though I had scarcely used the card in recent memory.



The Beginning
What is the Gravis Ultrasound? Only the finest PC sound card from the classic DOS days. Back in the day (very early 1990s), most consumer PC sound cards were Yamaha OPL FM synthesizers paired with a basic digital to analog converter (DAC). Gravis, a company known for game controllers, dared to break with the dominant paradigm of Sound Blaster clones and create a sound card that had 32 digital channels.
Continue reading →

PC Video Conferencing in the Year 1999

Remember Intel’s custom flavor of H.263 cleverly named I.263? I think I have finally found an application that used it thanks to a recent thrift shop raid— Intel Video Phone:



The root directory of the disc has 2 copies of an intro.avi video. One copy uses Intel Indeo 3 video and PCM audio. The other uses I.263 video and an undetermined (presumably Intel-proprietary) audio codec — RIFF id 0x0402 at a bitrate of 88 kbits/sec for stereo, 22 kHz audio. The latter video looks awful but is significantly smaller (like 4 MB vs. 25 MB).

This is the disc marked as “Send it to a friend…”. Here’s the way this concept was supposed to operate:

  • You buy an Intel Video Phone Camera Pack (forgotten page courtesy of the Internet Archive) which includes a camera and 2 CDs.
  • You install the camera and video phone software on your computer.
  • You send the other CD to the person whom you want to be able to see your face when you’re teleconferencing with them.
  • The other party installs the software.
  • The 2 of you may make an internet phone call presumably using commodity PC microphones for the voice component; the person who doesn’t have a camera is able to see the person who does have a camera.
  • In a cunning viral/network marketing strategy, Intel encourages the other party to buy the physical hardware as well so that they may broadcast their own visage back to the other person.

If you need further explanation, the intro lady does a great job:



I suspect I.263 was the video codec driving this since Indeo 3 would probably be inappropriate for real time video applications due to its vector quantizing algorithm.