f265 0.1 release - a free HEVC Encoder

[LigH]

The client can read YUV from either an intermediate file or from stdin (with the '-' argument).

Due to a lack of documentation in the executable help output, this was the target of my question. Is there any more verbose documentation available?

[x265.cc]

Due to a lack of documentation in the executable help output, this was the target of my question. Is there any more verbose documentation available?

http://f265.org/browse/f265/plain/doc/params.txt?h=develop

[Selur]

This also works on ms windows. (with cat for win32)
as does this one:
mencoder -lavdopts threads=8 -really-quiet -of rawvideo -o - -ovc raw -demuxer lavf -vfm ffmpeg -noskip -vf scale,format=i420 -forcedsubsonly -nosub -nosound -mc 0 test.avi | f265cli -v -w 640x352 -c 429 - test.265
problem is that this one doesn't work on Windows :(
-> hoping this can be fixed

[x265.cc]

problem is that this one doesn't work on Windows :(
-> hoping this can be fixed

Seems to be fixed.

http://www.xup.to/dl,11509676/F265.7z/

[Selur]

Nice, thanks for the build. :)

[Selur]

@x265.cc: how about a f265 build bot? ;)

[x265.cc]

@x265.cc: how about a f265 build bot? ;)

I think this project is a lot smarter then the x265 project, so this is definitively an option.
(Only if they don't provide an own one, and if there are more commits).

It's funny that there is still no buildbot for x265 like x265.cc
(Automated, fast, current compiler/tool/libraries).

//edit: "funny" is the wrong word, "missing" is more appropriate.

[Selur]

It's funny that there is still no buildbot for x265 like x265.cc
http://chromashift.org/x265_builds/ does daily x265 builds iirc., LigH also uploads frequently new builds to his mediafire share,...

[BadFrame]

I think this project is a lot smarter then the x265 project, so this is definitively an option.


Smarter how? Are they doing something technically different in their implementation ?

[nevcairiel]

Smarter how? Are they doing something technically different in their implementation ?

He is just annoyed that he was asked to shut down his site because they didn't like it being named x265.cc (too close to the original project, etc).

[BadFrame]

He is just annoyed that he was asked to shut down his site because they didn't like it being named x265.cc (too close to the original project, etc).

Ahh, and here I thought it might be something interesting on a technical level, thanks for the heads up.

[microchip8]

He is just annoyed that he was asked to shut down his site because they didn't like it being named x265.cc (too close to the original project, etc).

Maybe f265.cc or f265-buildbot.cc is a good suggestion?

[x265.cc]

http://chromashift.org/x265_builds/ does daily x265 builds iirc., LigH also uploads frequently new builds to his mediafire share,...

Yep,

Current:

Chromashift: No GCC, "Only" daily builds
LigH: not automated, One build after (arround) one/two weeks, old toolchain
x265.eu: Really old toolchain, "Only" daily builds
x265.ru: Old toolchain, not automated (one build after 3-4 days)

Outdated:

x265.cc: HTTPS, Current GCC / MSVC toolchain, automated (repo checked every 60 seconds, ~20 minutes buildtime).

Since i'm to lazy to build them manualy i currently use LigH builds if they are current (due to the new toolchain) and if not the ones from x265.eu

Ahh, and here I thought it might be something interesting on a technical level, thanks for the heads up.

f265 looks much more like an opensource project (like x264) than x265. (mostly due to there marketing manager)

see http://x265.cc

Oh and hey, "shutting down x265.cc" is not successfull (see x265.ru / x265.eu) nor useful.

[BadFrame]

f265 looks much more like an opensource project (like x264) than x265. (mostly due to there marketing manager)


Not following your logic, both projects are 'open source', however if one of them is more like x264 then it's x265, it uses the same license (GPL) and the same business model as x264 (free to use as open source under GPL, but you can pay to use it for proprietary purposes). What am I missing ?

[Procrastinating]

Not following your logic, both projects are 'open source', however if one of them is more like x264 then it's x265, it uses the same license (GPL) and the same business model as x264 (free to use as open source under GPL, but you can pay to use it for proprietary purposes). What am I missing ?

x264 is trademarked by VideoLan, a non-profit organisation. x265 is(or is trying to be) trademarked by multicoreware, a profit seeking business. The difference is in ways subtle, such as multicoreware trying to use their trademark to prevent people from releasing x265 builds.

[sneaker_ger]

x264 is trademarked by VideoLan, a non-profit organisation. x265 is(or is trying to be) trademarked by multicoreware, a profit seeking business. The difference is in ways subtle, such as multicoreware trying to use their trademark to prevent people from releasing x265 builds.
I wrote an answer to that in the x265 thread. (As it's off-topic here.)

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1688644#post1688644