Quote:
Originally Posted by borked
Well, it isn't actually pixel by pixel
|
It surely isn't
But try telling people that
it's actually based on binary hashing originally, to circumvent compression technologies which is stripping down an images components by converting RGB to YCbCr format for hash extraction eg, and you'll understand why I described it as pixel by pixel comparing of the two images or videos.
Once people get the idea, they can understand it further, that it doesn't have to be a pixel by pixel thing, you can do something more smart and less CPU hungry. But not the other way around - I tried to explain what the DFP is several times to several different people and it never worked unless I started of by saying "well it's like comparing two images pixel by pixel to see if they match".
To add to the confusion, most people tend to think that DFP is the thing that Hollywood uses to watermark their new releases to see what cinema it leaked from to torrents. And you need to explain that it aint so too, digital watermarking and digital fingerprinting are different things.
And yet another group of people think that DFP is something similar to MD5 hash signature and could be easily circumvented by making small changes to a file.
By no means DFP is an easy sell
Quote:
|
It's not really very CPU intensive though - what is (and bandwidth intensive too) is detecting it, once the video has "gone out"
|
Yep that's what I meant - detecting videos is CPU intensive, because you need to compare every downloaded video with every protected video that is in your database (it could be millions of the protected videos for all I know, now go compare that with every single tube vid that is out there).
BTW, if you have any good DFP links, please post them either here on in your educational thread.