Video Sharing Web Site

[Wyattthedog]

Generaly speaking is using the x264 codec a good choice as opposed to flash for a youtube clone site?

After reading thru the forum here I haven't seen any refferences to it. I did try to search.
Alot of the dicussions are way over my head. I'm seeing a steap learning curve in front of me but thought I'd find out first what maybe the pros ans cons so to speak. Before I went any further.

Appreciate any comments
Wyatt

[mitsubishi]

Flash isn't a video codec, it's an application environment. Flash does in the newest version support h.264.

Microsoft Silverlight doesn't support h.264 (yet... hopefully), which is appalling, it just supports, I think WMV8/9 and VC-1.

[Sagekilla]

If you could somehow find a way to stream an x264 encoded video, yes it would be. You'd just need to use 2-pass bitrate and it would do wonderful. I've already played around with using low bitrate and semi-high resolution (bigger than 320x240 at least) using x264 and I got some very nice results, even upscaled to 1680x###

[Wyattthedog]

We did try doing some streaming today and were really impressed with the quality but found some laging or stuturing.

Are those the issue you run into ? So we may see some improvment using a lower bitrate?

[Wyattthedog]

I can't figure out how to stream the video without it downloading the whole file first.

Is seems to be the only way to watch it without it lagging

Is there any way around the having whole file being downloaded first?

[sillKotscha]

I can't figure out how to stream the video without it downloading the whole file first.

here are some streaming examples (http://www.jeroenwijering.com/extras/streaming.html) using the JW Media Player...

[Ranguvar]

Stage6 has already proved MPEG-4 ASP can reach a wide audience, and deliver amazing quality/streamability: http://stage6.divx.com/

[sillKotscha]

yes, that could be an option but afaik flash got a much wider distribution...

and I don't really know what he wants...

- a youtube clone website?? so, other can upload their content to (and remember, youtube is NOT a streaming website)...
- a website where just videofiles are hosted and visitors can click/watch'em
- a real time streaming solution like someone could imagine from the ABC site here (http://dynamic.abc.go.com/streaming/landing?lid=ABCCOMGlobalMenu&lpos=FEP) but of course with other content...

what do you want with your site?? What audience shall your site reach - if geeks, well they don't complain about installing a divx-web plugin but grannies might do :)

if you decide to give flash a chance... do you wanna stick with flash6 or flash8 or do you wanna be up2date and give flash avc-content a try?? -> ur visitors always need an up2date flash-plugin...

what have you tried out - tell us your encoding experiments you tried out so far.

what kind of server do you have?? What scripts can be used??

etc. pp ...

[Dark Shikari]

Stage6 has already proved MPEG-4 ASP can reach a wide audience, and deliver amazing quality/streamability: http://stage6.divx.com/
The only reason it delivers amazing quality is because Stage6 is willing to blow tens of millions of dollars on unsustainably high bandwidth.

[sillKotscha]

The only reason it delivers amazing quality is because Stage6 is willing to blow tens of millions of dollars on unsustainably high bandwidth.

that's true, but let's not hijack this thread of the topic starter please ...

[Dark Shikari]

that's true, but let's not hijack this thread of the topic starter please ...Its fully related. Any codec makes a good streaming solution if you don't care about bandwidth; the point is that bandwidth is far more important than people realize.

[Wyattthedog]

I should have been clearer here the video would be a progressive download


Although I can't really be sure about the viewers I would opt to ask them to install the divx-web plugin if that would result in higher quality results the same would be true
in giving flash avc-content a try

I would definitely require the viewers to install what ever is required to ensure that best quality

I have tried Mencoder with Flash 9 and and x264

The server details are

Dual quad core xenon, 6 gigs ram, kernel 2.6.18-8.1.8.el5.028stab039.1PAE, running CentOS 5, hyperVM and cpanel an main vps

Scripts: php, perl, python, ruby on rails

[Wyattthedog]

I went over to check out stage6 and the quality is amazing!

If as you say the issue is lots of bandwith can those results be gotten on a much smaller scale with alot less bandwith?

[Inventive Software]

What about Shoutcast and NSV?

[ilovejedd]

If you could somehow find a way to stream an x264 encoded video, yes it would be. You'd just need to use 2-pass bitrate and it would do wonderful. I've already played around with using low bitrate and semi-high resolution (bigger than 320x240 at least) using x264 and I got some very nice results, even upscaled to 1680x###

QuickTime supports instant viewing of MP4 AVC. You don't even have to add a hint track. Besides, a lot of people already have QuickTime installed.

Sample html code:

<OBJECT CLASSID="clsid:02BF25D5-8C17-4B23-BC80-D3488ABDDC6B" WIDTH="320" HEIGHT="256"
CODEBASE="http://www.apple.com/qtactivex/qtplugin.cab">
<PARAM name="SRC" VALUE="video.mp4">
<PARAM name="AUTOPLAY" VALUE="true">
<PARAM name="CONTROLLER" VALUE="true">
<PARAM name="LOOP" VALUE="false">
<EMBED SRC="video.mp4" WIDTH="320" HEIGHT="256" AUTOPLAY="true" CONTROLLER="true" LOOP="false" PLUGINSPAGE="http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/">
</EMBED>
</OBJECT>

Another option, wasn't there a browser plug-in for VLC?

[Dark Shikari]

I went over to check out stage6 and the quality is amazing!

If as you say the issue is lots of bandwith can those results be gotten on a much smaller scale with alot less bandwith?MPEG-4 ASP starts to lose very badly to AVC at low bitrates.

[Ranguvar]

Actually I think the $ comment is relevant. I didn't know that :p

It also means AVC would be more necessary for HQ streaming, because bitrates would have to be lower.

The question is, what will happen first... cheap higher bandwidth? Or enough faster PCs out there that site makers will decide to use good level AVC (CABAC, deblocking, etc.)

[Dark Shikari]

Actually I think the $ comment is relevant. I didn't know that :p

It also means AVC would be more necessary for HQ streaming, because bitrates would have to be lower.

The question is, what will happen first... cheap higher bandwidth? Or enough faster PCs out there that site makers will decide to use good level AVC (CABAC, deblocking, etc.)H.264 at standard-definition resolution can play on the vast majority of consumer PCs. Its only HD that's an issue.

[Wyattthedog]

Thanks for all the info.
I'm learning quite a bit here.
I hope you can help with a few more questions

Is there a way to quantify the bandwith requirments?
Is it strickly related to file size?
If I am serving a 10mb file is it the same bandwith regardless of the codec being used

If i understand what is being said even with bandwith requirments being met The viewers must have fairly fast computers is that correct?

Thanks again

[slavickas]

What about Shoutcast and NSV?

NSV is more useful for "live" video, due sc listings in winamp

[ilovejedd]

Thanks for all the info.
I'm learning quite a bit here.
I hope you can help with a few more questions

Is there a way to quantify the bandwith requirments?
Is it strickly related to file size?
If I am serving a 10mb file is it the same bandwith regardless of the codec being used

If i understand what is being said even with bandwith requirments being met The viewers must have fairly fast computers is that correct?

Thanks again

How many concurrent users are you expecting? Just huge monthly bandwidth won't cut it. If you have 1,000 users viewing a 10-minute 500 kbps stream at the same time, you need 500,000 kbps sustained rate plus some slack just for the streaming server. That's already 300GB for 10 minutes. Then, you'll also need additional bandwidth or a separate account/bandwidth for the webserver.

The viewers don't really need ultra-fast computers. Even the lowest end computers (new ones) can play up to mid-resolution h.264 with CABAC. It's only hi-def content that most PCs are choking on.

Hope that helps.

[CruNcher]

Ehh and also Licensing could become an Isue i think this year (2008) the free Streaming Period given to everyone runs out for H.264 not so sure tough if i remember that correctly, but i know only 1 Service currently that uses H.264 (in the term Streaming) and that would be Joost. I doub't flash is gonna survive when Silverlight fully hits, it's clearly superior (geez me saying that about a Microsoft product) and will definately give a big boost to VC-1 as a Internet Video Format.
Im also almost 100% sure Stage6 sooner or later is gonna be upgraded to DivX Q aka DivX/Mainconept H.264 when it's ready for primetime :)

[mitsubishi]

I doub't flash is gonna survive when Silverlight fully hits, it's clearly superior (geez me saying that about a Microsoft product) and will definately give a big boost to VC-1 as a Internet Video Format.

I love the look of silverlight, well v2 at least (with the full CLR). I've seen a MS employee say h.264 will be supported if there is demand. So let's start badgering them now and try and get it in before 2.0 go's gold. I'm not sure how much encouragement they need, since MS are paying for moonlights codecs already. Moonlight can, I believe, be compiled with ffmpeg and use h.264, but that's no good for internet distribution...

[Ranguvar]

H.264 at standard-definition resolution can play on the vast majority of consumer PCs. Its only HD that's an issue.
Vast majority of PCs sold now, yes... not sure about the legions of grandma PCs being used to surf YouTube. Obviously, YouTube is using/will use a much lower resolution and profile of AVC, I would like good Main profile, ~D1 res (just clarifying)

[Dark Shikari]

Vast majority of PCs sold now, yes... not sure about the legions of grandma PCs being used to surf YouTube. Obviously, YouTube is using/will use a much lower resolution and profile of AVC, I would like good Main profile, ~D1 res (just clarifying)Flash is not exactly fast for an H.263 decoder. It uses up to 20% of my Core 2 Duo's CPU power to decode 320x240 video--slower than FFDshow decoding H.264.

[DeathTheSheep]

True that. But terms of the flash decoder (not ffdshow), QVGA Baseline AVC w/1 ref decodes slower still! Unless you're using a custom low-overhead player that feeds the stream directly to the decoder (like JW).

[ilovejedd]

Vast majority of PCs sold now, yes... not sure about the legions of grandma PCs being used to surf YouTube. Obviously, YouTube is using/will use a much lower resolution and profile of AVC, I would like good Main profile, ~D1 res (just clarifying)

Ah, but even YouTube/Flash videos require quite a bit of processing power to decode properly. On a PIII 733MHz w/256MB Shared RAM running on Win98SE, YouTube actually chokes a bit, as do 320x240 MP4 AVC encodes for the PSP.

[Ranguvar]

Ah, but even YouTube/Flash videos require quite a bit of processing power to decode properly. On a PIII 733MHz w/256MB Shared RAM running on Win98SE, YouTube actually chokes a bit, as do 320x240 MP4 AVC encodes for the PSP.
True. For the second bit, you mean the PC chokes on them, right? The PSP has a hardware AVC decoder, it does fantastic :D

[ilovejedd]

True. For the second bit, you mean the PC chokes on them, right?

Yeah. Was too lazy to type out "the PC chokes a bit on YouTube videos". Point is, neither low resolution Flash videos (VP6?) nor MPEG-4 AVC plays all that great on older computers so might as well go with something that gives higher quality. Iirc, the PC did better on the encodes for the PSP than it did YouTube videos, but then again, that maybe due to the fact that there were several tabs open on Firefox while viewing YouTube whereas only VLC was open while viewing AVC.

The PSP has a hardware AVC decoder, it does fantastic :D

Yep, it does. LoL, the PSP played the video better than my old PC did, but then again, that's to be expected. Waiting for the 16GB MS PRO Duo to come out so I can get 8GB ones for cheaper. It's currently hovering around $110 on Amazon so it's not too long before it goes below $100. :D

[DeathTheSheep]

We have only to wait until CorePlayerX (embedded) is finally released, which will take flash's place as the multi-platform web AVC player of choice amongst those with low-end specs. It uses an even more advanced version of the CoreAVC decoder, meaning 200mhz is more than enough for a QVGA stream. As I have a version of this decoder on my PocketPC (without any form of acceleration) and it plays QVGA/iPod mp4's full screen without a stutter, it again proves that the right software can counteract some of the beefy hardware requirements of today, enabling users to view streaming AVC content with significantly less processing power than they can today.

[Ranguvar]

Yeah. Was too lazy to type out "the PC chokes a bit on YouTube videos". Point is, neither low resolution Flash videos (VP6?) nor MPEG-4 AVC plays all that great on older computers so might as well go with something that gives higher quality. Iirc, the PC did better on the encodes for the PSP than it did YouTube videos, but then again, that maybe due to the fact that there were several tabs open on Firefox while viewing YouTube whereas only VLC was open while viewing AVC.



Yep, it does. LoL, the PSP played the video better than my old PC did, but then again, that's to be expected. Waiting for the 16GB MS PRO Duo to come out so I can get 8GB ones for cheaper. It's currently hovering around $110 on Amazon so it's not too long before it goes below $100. :D
I already got my 80GB memstick - the Archos 605 WiFi :D
Although hacking the Archos is fun (www.archosfans.com), I will never leave the PSP scene though. So much power :D

Sorry for the off-topic-ness.

[Sagekilla]

Would CorePlayerX be a freely available plugin for web browsers, or will we have to buy it? The issue of buying it is really a non-issue for me though, since a very fast decoder to supplant flash would give me all the more reason to purchase it.

[DeathTheSheep]

Now that you might want to ask betaboy. :)