Avisynth 3 - dead project? [Archive]

Manao

17th August 2008, 20:15

The project is (un)officially dead. What happened was mostly a lack of interest. Lots of people would have liked a portable avisynth, but nobody wanted to work on it aside the two devs. The possibility to make avs 2.5 work on linux through wine + avs2yuv and the upcoming avs 2.6 with additionnal colorspaces & proper multithreading killed the potential advantage of avs 3.0 over 2.x.

In the end, it's dead because avs 2.x works, so it's not a big loss either.

Sharktooth

18th August 2008, 02:07

really sad to hear.

vcmohan

18th August 2008, 03:18

Its a pity that the project is dead for all practical purposes. Avisynth is a free software under GPL 2.0 By not making available a straight out of box working adaptation of Avisynth available for Linux, many first time users and converts to Linux are discouraged. This shows a bias to Windows XP . Wish and hope some Geeks develop the system for Linux.

anton_foy

18th August 2008, 09:46

I agree. Switching to Linux now and I will miss AviSynth so much.

Manao

18th August 2008, 10:05

This shows a bias to Windows XPYou're welcome to port it

Something else I had forgotten to say : avisynth on windows is usefull and used because of vfw. There are no equivalent on linux which means that if there were a linux version, every program would need specific code to interface with it, or would need to use a third party program like avs2yuv.

And, once again, you can always use wine. Why do you want a native solution, and why do you expect devs to lose time reinventing the wheel when a working solution already exists ?

Gusar

18th August 2008, 10:24

The only thing that doesn't work in wine is fft3dgpu, so one has to use the software fft3dfilter. If someone could port fft3dgpu from directx to OpenGL, that would be the ultimate killer. Everything else works so there's no real need for Avisynth3.

Adub

18th August 2008, 16:30

yeah, but what are the speed comparisons like when running Avisynth on native XP, vs under Wine?

Manao

18th August 2008, 17:44

Almost no speed impact if the script is a slow script. It might amount to one or two additionnal frame copy, ie far less than 1 ms / output frame. That means a script working at 25fps on windows will work at 24.4 fps.

And fft3dgpu, as previously stated, doesn't work, so if you were using it, you'll be slower (but then, a native avs 3.0 wouldn't solve that either...)

mellon

18th August 2008, 19:38

I'd like to have a native x64 version on Windows. I know squid_80 made a port years ago. But all the recent changes... I would compile it myself - but the assembly is the pain.

I'm really happy with x64 MPC-HC and x64 ffDshow. Avisyth is missing.

Gavino

18th August 2008, 23:08

Perhaps Avisynth 3 would have been completed much sooner if they had limited themselves to merely porting the existing functionality to linux.

I wasn't around at the time, but browsing the archives, it appears they were overly ambitious and wanted to extend the script language in all sorts of ways as well. (A noble goal, but surely a long term one.)

talen9

18th August 2008, 23:58

And I think I remember that, even if AviSynth 3.0 was actually completed, the majority of the plugins should have been rewritten too, this was a major halting point I presume ...

Sharktooth

19th August 2008, 01:39

@manao: gstreamer exists on both windows and linux. no need for VFW.

Manao

19th August 2008, 05:58

If I take a simple example, let's say x264, it supports VFW input, but not gstreamer input. There's no need for VFW except that it's the de facto standard, supported by (almost) everybody, and gstreamer is far from that.
I wasn't around at the time, but browsing the archives, it appears they were overly ambitious and wanted to extend the script language in all sorts of ways as well. (A noble goal, but surely a long term one.)Indeed, it was a complete rewrite, using advanced & clean C++ (based on boost). As much as I like avisynth's functionalities the code base isn't what you'd call clean. And, would I have wanted to port that to linux, I would also have started from scratch (porting code you don't like isn't fun, and it's a project done in one's free time).

cogman

19th August 2008, 13:23

Sorry, but there is one problem with AVS2Yuv that hasn't been covered. Multithreading. To date I have never seen any plugin or program run under wine that wine multithreaded. :(. That would be why I miss 3.0. Unfortunately I don't think I am a good enough programmer to finish the project.

Sharktooth

19th August 2008, 14:09

Ranguvar

19th August 2008, 14:53

I switched to Linux and then switched back. Using Wine/avs2yuv just has too many limitations (multithreading, fft3dgpu, no AvsP-like tools, etc). Until there's native AviSynth support on Linux, or at least an improved compatibility layer, I can't switch. Shame really, everything else about Linux I love. I can't wait to dump Windows.

martino

19th August 2008, 15:29

You can always use a VM... not exactly rocket science, but be prepared to loose some speed.

Ranguvar

20th August 2008, 13:12

Sharktooth

20th August 2008, 13:29

agreed. VMs are not always an option. we should convince the avs devs to go the multiplatform way.

mikeytown2

20th August 2008, 21:02

no we should convince other software (http://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/apps/) (Avidemux, ffmpeg, x264, vdub, blender, freeframe, ect...) to use gstreamer. if they don't want to use it then we would be waisting our time. Also i think the lack of involvement with Google summer of code is what killed it.

In order to go multiplatform, is gstreamer our only viable option?

Sharktooth

21st August 2008, 02:59

dunno, but gstreamer is "working".

cogman

21st August 2008, 06:36

dunno, but gstreamer is "working".

The only reason I could think of not to use gstreamer is because it still might be fluxing on the standards being used (I couldn't tell you for sure as I've never looked into the gstreamer API).

I think more apps like AVIsynth started using it, we would see bigger improvements in it. Avisynth for linux would also spawn more video editing apps for linux IMO.

Kurtnoise

21st August 2008, 06:56

In order to go multiplatform, is gstreamer our only viable option?
who knows that a framework is a viable option ?

btw, have a look at Elisa (http://elisa.fluendo.com/) or SongBird which use GStreamer...It's really promising.

d'Oursse

21st August 2008, 09:22

About AVS3, i discuss regularly with Bidoche about avs3, and we have some plans. Bidoche does not want to abandon avs3, it is his little baby.

As Manao said, it's mainly lack of motivations. And this lack of motivations also comes from lack of devs. I had several talks on irc with people who wanted to code on it, but none of them did code something. There was 3 contributors: Kurosu, Manao and myself. esby also had several discussions with Bidoche about direct streaming. That's all. No people from the avs 2 branch. Ian helped us a lot when we migrated to svn, though.

I try to convince Bidoche to work on it again. Maybe I'll succeed soon. If he indeed work on avs3 again, and if there are no more developpers, I don't think that the project will have a long life, though.

About avs3 and it's use, what i can say is that i already had a working avs3 with x264. Also, with the help of gstreamer, any gstreamer app would be able to use automatically avs3 (for example, open a video player and open an avs script, then the video player would play what the script does). It's just a matter of adding a source to gstreamer, plus other minor things. Another interest of gstreamer is that it works on lots of other platforms, like mac os x or solaris. Hence, same for avs3.

last note: about x264 and gstreamer, i also added a gstreamer input to x264. But is it really useful ? The only interest would be to use the best options of x264, as the x264 plugin of gstreamer might support only a few of them.

Sharktooth

28th August 2008, 14:18

if devs are lacking i would try to host the project to sourceforge and ask for help to the SF community... spamming help requests all over the AV forum/blogs/websites.
also random contribution will also help... so maybe asking the mplayer, videolan, ffmpeg devs would be an idea too...

Kurtnoise

28th August 2008, 15:50

avs3 is already hosted on SF (http://avisynth2.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/avisynth2/Avisynth3/)...;)

Bidoche

3rd September 2008, 10:12

I have not given up on avs3 yet, I just don't want it to be a waste of time.

I have already spent days on it, and while it would annoy me to no end if it was for naught... I don't really want to just up the ante.

Truth be told, the current situation is essentially my fault.
It was my first really big project and I fell quite hard for the Second System Effect.
If I were to start now, I would make things differently (for a start I probably wouldn't branch...)

As for now, if I were to work on it again, it would have to be on items with the higher ROI :
- Fix avs3 trunk (obviously)
- Scrap hand-made compiler and bind to a dynamic language instead (Ruby). It would have to be made so both avs2.5 and avs3 can and do use it.
- ...

Guest

3rd September 2008, 13:27

She's dead, Jim.

Inventive Software

3rd September 2008, 14:29

It's never dead until SF activity reaches 0. ;)

Wilbert

3rd September 2008, 22:52

Hey Bidoche!

Good to hear from you! I recall from discussions with Caro, that the main issue he wanted to see fixed, is the low level parser. Is that still the case?

NerdWithNoLife

4th September 2008, 00:19

The thing I would most like to see is rendering with 16 or higher bits per channel. It would do wonders for tweaking and color correction.

But I can't have it all. And I for one am very very thankful for AviSynth at all! It's hard to imagine that a year ago I had no idea what it was or how to use it - now I use it almost every day!

Bidoche

4th September 2008, 12:23

@Wilbert

The low level parser is no longer an issue considered.

I mean it was part of my rewrite effort of the parser as a compiler with all the gadgets.
Which was A BAD IDEA...
It was interesting and made me a better programmer, but it is too complex and time consuming.

Now the plan is to bind to a scripting language which would be Ruby unless someone makes a really good job of convincing me otherwise.

@NerdWithNoLife

avs3 has those but with no filters supported

RadicalEd

4th September 2008, 16:41

Bidoche: Really good to hear from you! You should come back to #avisynth one of these days :)

TheFluff

5th September 2008, 11:00

Bidoche: Really good to hear from you! You should come back to #avisynth one of these days :)

oh hey aren't you that guy (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=127187) with with the avs3-based NLE? how's it hanging?

RadicalEd

5th September 2008, 14:15

oh hey aren't you that guy (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=127187) with with the avs3-based NLE? how's it hanging?Pretty good, but I'm kind of helpless until Bidoche gets his muse back and works on Avisynth again :/
Edit: Also, my other guy that I was working with (and who was much more coding-savvy than I) sort of dropped out of the project, so that's another setback. I think I've found out by now why "many have tried, all have failed".

Sharktooth

6th September 2008, 02:33

avs3 is already hosted on SF (http://avisynth2.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/avisynth2/Avisynth3/)...;)
i meant as a standalone project...

Ranguvar

6th September 2008, 04:08

What I'm looking for is Linux support :p Once I have AviSynth working well in Linux (NO, avs2yuv is NOT an option x.x), I'm switching again. So, Bidoche, if you do follow this thing through, you ROCK :p

Other than Linux, 64-bit support and native multithreading would be very very nice, but nothing compared to the ability to use AviSynth well in Linux.

njahnke

6th September 2008, 06:15

Since I rip a DVD or two a day, I'm not prepared to spend a vast amount of my time in a VM. Plus, I'm not aware of any VMs today that can use all 4 cores (VMware only does two), and you have to cut up your RAM, and then I have to worry about transferring massive files, especially for ripping Blu-ray...

the latest beta of vmware fusion supports up to 4 cpu cores. however due to windoze stupidity you can't just reconfigure an existing vm and have the os recognize 4 cores; it's a bit more complicated than that. however, reinstalling the os will fix it.

Ranguvar

7th September 2008, 16:37

the latest beta of vmware fusion supports up to 4 cpu cores. however due to windoze stupidity you can't just reconfigure an existing vm and have the os recognize 4 cores; it's a bit more complicated than that. however, reinstalling the os will fix it.

Really? Well, even still, I don't think anyone believes that when you're doing one or two long x264 encodes a DAY, it's a good idea to run 2 OS's, with your RAM split between them. If I used AviSynth less, maybe, but it's become essential to me.

shevegen

27th December 2009, 02:55

Hmm. Back when I was on windows, and found this forum (i think it was in 2003) I soon learned to appreciate GordianKnot and so forth. Eventually I discovered Avisynth - still remember how Wilbert helped me with something which I found difficult. How cool Avisynth was!

Loads of filters, all in a "scripted" fashion - boy, that rocked!

Then I switched to Linux, and even though Linux in a way sucked, for coding work Linux absolutely rocks. No crippled shell, loads of programming languages working on it ... we also had other stuff such as avidemux and so forth.

I however stopped using Avisynth. The reason was not that I did not want to use it, but that it was kinda difficult to use on Linux. Ok, people say wine works ... but I don't know. I dont always have wine installed on Linux. And it also usually means that I have to go to some trouble before I can make it work ...

In my humble opinion, a cross-plattform avisynth would be absolutely cool. Whether it is called avisynth 3 or whether it is 2.5 continued slowly over time ... doesn't matter. Especially the filters are what makes avisynth so extremely powerful!

If I wouldn't suck at coding in C++ then I would help (I have been using mostly ruby since 2004) but I really suck at it. All kind of video stuff coding in C++ requires smart people.

Props to Bidoche, the other main dev too, and the other supporting guys. Perhaps we won't see Avisynth 3 cross plattform, but who knows what happens in 3 years with avisynth 2.x - cross plattform code shouldn't be impossible :D