Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: An Interview With The Developers Of FFmpeg

  1. #11

    Default no mention of DIRAC

    there was no mention of DIRAC

    its a wavelet format and comes with no patents...

    it has 'drac' for use in the ISO media file format Also, an Object Type Indication for use in the MPEG4 systems layer has been assigned for Dirac video.

    so that would be really nice to see implemented as a encoder

    regards

    John Jones
    http://www.johnjones.me.uk

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459

    Default

    ffmpeg is a very good product , BUT please start providing a nightly or even just a weekly binary build AND Direct URL link of the current git for popular platforms....

    its really disapointing that you cant even easly find a current binary for a given platform directly off the main FFmpeg site page.....

    for instance, even your July 4th, 2009 blog http://rob.opendot.cl/index.php/usef...uide/#examples
    makes reference to useing this currently available cli option.
    "
    Single-Pass Constant Rate Factor (CRF) Example
    Or for a single pass CRF encode:

    ffmpeg -i INFILE -acodec libfaac -ab 96k -vcodec libx264 -vpre hq -crf 22 -threads 0 OUTPUT.mp4

    "

    now clearly the -crf 21 through -crf 26 is a *VERY GOOD THING, however you dont bother to link to any binary we can find or use, AND the only semi official FFMpeg binarys to be found for windows does NOT even understand the required some might say vital today 'vpre hq' to produce H@L4.0 or H@L4.1 (SD)HD.mp4 High Quality output files as given in that informative yet simple working example, anyone will be trying.

    the fact the blog doesnt even allow annon posting does Nothing to help the new users trying to use the current official cli FFmpeg on any platform least of all the windows novice.. never mind the linux novice....

    so were Exactly can a person simply find a current binary compiled FFmepg version for the popular platforms,and a list of the additions in it, not from the FFmpeg official site it appears...currently.

    preferably with and without the newest x264 "Macroblock Tree Ratecontrol" testing (Release candidate) as that seems to be the very good latest addition from the x86/64 windows libx264/x264 developer(s)

    very few ordinary (win32) people actually have a GCC compiler environment installed and fully configured, and even ordinary (linux) people that do , mosly dont ever use it, or even know how to... current regulary updated binarys are good, please supply at least direct links to them on the official site ASAP.

    * as kemuri-_9 points out on D9 "every raise of QP/CRF by 6 'points' halves the bitrate.
    this could be applied in vice versa as well: a decrease of QP/CRF by 6 'points' doubles the bitrate."

    for a better high quality Encode, -vpre hq -crf 22 is a very good thing, use it if you can actually find a binary that actually understands -vpre hq.
    Last edited by popper; 08-09-2009 at 10:39 AM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by popper View Post
    so were Exactly can a person simply find a current binary compiled FFmepg version for the popular platforms,and a list of the additions in it, not from the FFmpeg official site it appears...currently.
    That's really the responsibility of your distro and not the responsibility of FFmpeg devs.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459

    Default

    thats odd, you think its not the FFmpeg devs responsability to provide at least basic links to known working current binary compiles of their product....

    i always thought a distro's main job was to provide a stable version of a given app they choose to include that works with the other 3rd party code on there, not provide cutting edge GIT binarys that may kill the distro in one way or another....

    id like to see MS distro's provide current FFmpeg , not even cutting edge GIT on their CD/DVD, but thats NOT going to happen is it...

    so do the most basic google search and find me a working current windows FFMpeg binary that knows even the -vpre hq option never mind the x264 "Macroblock Tree Ratecontrol" testing (Release candidate) options, the chances are you cant without some serious search modifications and lots of following unknown 3rd party links to it...

    AND No Cheating compiling a windows version yourself and putting up a URL, ohh go on then, ill allow that, anything to get a current working version without going through these hoops, getting a current binary FFmpeg should never be this hard.
    Last edited by popper; 08-09-2009 at 12:25 PM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by popper View Post
    thats odd, you think its not the FFmpeg devs responsability to provide at least basic links to known working current binary compiles of their product....

    i always thought a distro's main job was to provide a stable version of a given app they choose to include that works with the other 3rd party code on there, not provide cutting edge GIT binarys that may kill the distro in one way or another....

    id like to see MS distro's provide current FFmpeg , not even cutting edge GIT on their CD/DVD, but thats NOT going to happen is it...

    so do the most basic google search and find me a working current windows FFMpeg binary that knows even the -vpre hq option never mind the x264 "Macroblock Tree Ratecontrol" testing (Release candidate) options, the chances are you cant without some serious search modifications and lots of following unknown 3rd party links to it...

    AND No Cheating compiling a windows version yourself and putting up a URL, ohh go on then, ill allow that, anything to get a current working version without going through these hoops, getting a current binary FFmpeg should never be this hard.
    A distro is responsible for packaging and compiling. You can't expect the FFmpeg devs to know all libs you have installed on your system to fill external dependencies. After that daily builds are solely up to the end user (or a kind 3rd party).

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by popper View Post
    thats odd, you think its not the FFmpeg devs responsability to provide at least basic links to known working current binary compiles of their product....

    i always thought a distro's main job was to provide a stable version of a given app they choose to include that works with the other 3rd party code on there, not provide cutting edge GIT binarys that may kill the distro in one way or another....

    id like to see MS distro's provide current FFmpeg , not even cutting edge GIT on their CD/DVD, but thats NOT going to happen is it...

    so do the most basic google search and find me a working current windows FFMpeg binary that knows even the -vpre hq option never mind the x264 "Macroblock Tree Ratecontrol" testing (Release candidate) options, the chances are you cant without some serious search modifications and lots of following unknown 3rd party links to it...

    AND No Cheating compiling a windows version yourself and putting up a URL, ohh go on then, ill allow that, anything to get a current working version without going through these hoops, getting a current binary FFmpeg should never be this hard.
    I'm a little confused why you are asking about the issue of getting current windows FFmpeg builds (which are admitedly harder to compile than the *nix versions), but I was able to find a daily build from the 7th of this month quite quickly: go to the main website, click on documentation, choose FFmpeg Windows help (which doesn't actually mention builds to be fair), choose builds, autobuilds, and tada!

    But I'm totally perplexed at your inability to find an x264 build with the *brand new* mb-tree patch: to even hear about the patch, you'd need to be following one of three sources: doom9, Dark Shikari's blog, or the #x264 channel, any of which could point you to current builds of the software.

    But to answer your earlier question, the software devs for FFmpeg think their time is better spent improving the software continuously then pushing out releases. Releases would be a good idea, but given how easy it is to compile FFmpeg (x264 even more so), I'll give them a pass on that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •