Crashless way to remux OGM in matroska? [Archive]

KpeX

22nd June 2003, 05:32

Hehe....crashless method ;)

That's interesting that it crashes with vdubmod.....maybe somebody who knows more than me could give you some advice on why that is.....I use mkvmerge for all my transmuxing, multiplatform CLI tool available from the Matroska Homepage (http://www.matroska.org), alternatively you could try gabest's directshow muxer available from his sourceforge page (http://sourceforge.net/projects/guliverkli) . Hope one of these helps, Sirber.

Edit: corrected link

mustaneekeri

22nd June 2003, 12:19

i have not read this forum for a while.
I had the impression OGM and Matroska are both container formats?

Sirber

22nd June 2003, 15:08

yep

like AVI or RMVB, but in development (Matroska) or abandonned (OGM).

[edit]

I got it. Directly remuxing a OGM into Matroska with VDubMod crash. I have to demux all in separate files (Video --> avi, Audio --> original format) and remux it manually with VDubMod into matroska.

junglemike

22nd June 2003, 19:00

Sorry, can you explain me what does it mean abandonned (OGM). ?

Suiryc

22nd June 2003, 19:27

Originally posted by Sirber
I got it. Directly remuxing a OGM into Matroska with VDubMod crash. I have to demux all in separate files (Video --> avi, Audio --> original format) and remux it manually with VDubMod into matroska.
Well direct transmuxing should also have worked :(
You use the latest CVS bugfix release right ? Is there a crash report ?

Koepi

22nd June 2003, 19:53

Originally posted by Sirber
like AVI or RMVB, but in development (Matroska) or abandonned (OGM).

Sirber,

now you really start to p*** me off by spreading false facts over and over again.

As i mentioned very often in the last weeks, I had contact with Tobias Waldvogel, the author of OggDS.
He will give the sources to the public soon. So it's not abandoned, and even OggMux is still in development.

Another thing: avi was good for years. Without any development. So the conclusion of yours would be, it's abandoned and bad?
Wrong. It's still good for several reasons/scenarios. Less development can indicate some maturity of code as well. *hint*

For you again, in bold and underlined:
OGM isn't abandoned, the OggDS sources will get released to the public by Tobias soon - development of the format and filters will continue then. For now, only OggMux and VDubMod/OGMTools still get developed and are working fine.

*big sigh*

Koepi

Sigmatador

22nd June 2003, 20:55

maybe koepi and sirber don't have the same definition of "soon" :p

ssjkakaroto

22nd June 2003, 22:51

@Sirber: as KpeX said you should try mkvmerge
this simple command should do it
mkvmerge --output "X:\path\output.mkv" "X:\path\input.ogm"
but if you still need chapter support them you'll have to stick with ogm for now

cya

Sirber

23rd June 2003, 01:36

Originally posted by Koepi
Sirber,

now you really start to p*** me off by spreading false facts over and over again.

As i mentioned very often in the last weeks, I had contact with Tobias Waldvogel, the author of OggDS.
He will give the sources to the public soon. So it's not abandoned, and even OggMux is still in development.

Another thing: avi was good for years. Without any development. So the conclusion of yours would be, it's abandoned and bad?
Wrong. It's still good for several reasons/scenarios. Less development can indicate some maturity of code as well. *hint*

For you again, in bold and underlined:
OGM isn't abandoned, the OggDS sources will get released to the public by Tobias soon - development of the format and filters will continue then. For now, only OggMux and VDubMod/OGMTools still get developed and are working fine.

*big sigh*

Koepi

If I remember well, OggDS has stopped at version 0.9.9.5 (last modfied 06.10.2002). We are now in middle 2003. OGM was left with bugs and closed source. So, IMHO, it's right to say it's not developped anymore. I didn't say that it won't continu in the futur.

AVI isn't developped anymore and it's not buggy.

***

I have a little question: Are you always offended when I talk about bugs or misfunctions of softwares, near or far, a little or not, related to you?

Animaniac

23rd June 2003, 02:03

With all due respect, I'm really tired of having to read posts where Koepi flies off his handle whenever anything negative regarding OGM is mentioned, especially when OGM and Matroska are juxtaposed. As I recall, Tobias has made an appearance before saying that he will release the sources to OggDS, and he has failed to do so. He has said it again; however, only time will tell if that will actually come to fruition. As of now, OGM development is stalled, and it's really hard to say otherwise. Nevertheless, I hope that in the near future, OGM can be integrated into the Ogg bitstream, so that there is only one definitive container associated with the Ogg project.

bond

23rd June 2003, 08:41

peace people!

the idea of putting video content into .ogg isnt abandoned, go to the xiph hp and you will find some small hints that they are still working on that issue...

koepi has done so much for the community, he has the right to "clear up incomplete" informations (and everybody who knows him just a little bit will understand in which way he will do this)

seems that the container issue will be the next big controversy in the "ripping scene"
perhaps we should update the forum rules a bit more clearly ("Do not ask "what's best" -> do not tell whats best, everybody has the right to use what he wants, nobody has the right to disrespect other peoples work...) in relation to codecs and containers!

Atamido

23rd June 2003, 10:29

Originally posted by bond
go to the xiph hp and you will find some small hints that they are still working on that issue... Or, just go read the Xiph mailing list. (http://www.xiph.org/archives/theora-dev/200306/0060.html)

The way that they are planning on storing Theora Ogg is not the same way that Ogm stores video. There are some issues with it, but I will not go into that. Suffice it to say that Ogg was not designed with video storage in mind. I have some ideas of how I think they could do it better, but I have never designed a codec, so I am not the most qualified person to comment on this.

My thought on it is that it will work fine for what they are designing it for. Ogg works great for streaming Vorbis. It will work fine for streaming Theora/Vorbis. It would even work fine for storing the same type of data that Ogm can store. But it is not future proof because they are not designing it for anything other than what they will use it for.

Matroska will be the container to use for future proofing tools to be able to handle more in the future. Ogm is fine for right now. Ogg will work great for whatever Xiph intends to use it for.
BTW, I have no idea who this David K. is.

tiki4

23rd June 2003, 16:37

Actually I'm a little sad, that Tobias doesn't want to develop OGM in the future. The creation of that format had a large impact here and elsewhere and up to the moment I must say it's one of the most flexible formats for general DVD backup. Please, the people who like WMV or Real don't flame me now.

However, in the time being I think Matroska will pick up most of the features of the OGM container and I'm quite sure even more. I'm pretty much impressed in what was achieved in the nearly 2 months since the release to the public. Anyhow that doesn't mean that OGM is dead for sure. Maybe after Tobias has released the sources to whoever (I think Xiph) they will be publicly available and some nostalgic guys will continue to work on it. Hopefully, there won't be the same fight as 'DivX 3.11 vs. DivX 4' or 'DivX 5 vs. XviD'...

Cheers,

tiki4

Sirber

23rd June 2003, 17:11

Why would I flame you? It's all about choices.

Koepi

23rd June 2003, 20:01

Hm. I thought we have no choice as long as we're not Mr. Anderson.

Which would be a very bad thing.

SCNR
Koepi

Sirber

23rd June 2003, 20:20

Originally posted by Koepi
Hm. I thought we have no choice as long as we're not Mr. Anderson.

Which would be a very bad thing.

SCNR
Koepi So, you don't choose what you use? Who's choosing for you?

bond

24th June 2003, 11:14

Originally posted by Koepi
Hm. I thought we have no choice as long as we're not Mr. Anderson.of course we have a choice that's why we accept the system/matrix ;)

Koepi

24th June 2003, 13:12

Originally posted by Sirber
Who's choosing for you?

If I'd only knew - I'd have the choice to reject that choice. But as of now, I don't know, so I have to live with my choices (even if they aren't mine).

Does that take me out of responsibility? ;)

I start to think that this "matrix philosophy" is really cheap and leads to nowhere. Let's hope "Revolution" clears that up.

On-topic again:
I don't see a fight between formats coming up. OGM is going to be fixed where there still are bugs, matroska sure makes some more progress to the full specs someday.
The only thing coming up will be "what's best?", and I tend to react according to forum rule 12:
Do not ask "what's best" because this question cannot be answered objectively. Each and everyone has their own view about what's best in a certain area. The best is what works best for you!
... and will for sure remind the people of that :)

regards
Koepi

bond

24th June 2003, 13:31

koepi you have to watch reloaded again and listen carefully to what the architect says ;) :
he talks about that the people need to have a choice otherwise they wouldnt accept the system (because of their primitive nature) thats why his first (but perfect) matrix was a disaster, it always forced the people to choose the perfect choice for them but the people rejected this dictation, the people need to feel that they can decide on their own, but this also leads to unperfect choices and an unperfect system/matrix...

so coming back to reality the people for example rejected the communist system because they didnt have the possibility to choose on their own, the state/system decides whats best

so to say now we have a free choice in an unfree world/matrix...

lol i really should lern now (nah i take the exam in october :D )

Suiryc

24th June 2003, 19:58

I wonder what XipH thinks about that.
Since Tobias is supposed to have joined XipH, wouldn't releasing his sources for the public now (and not when he joined) somewhat go against their plans ? IIRC it was announced (in this forum) that they wanted to do something like OGM (i.e. taking into account a wider range of audio/video/text data, and not something centered on their own codecs) but more official (and so officialy supported by XipH - OGM wasn't and isn't supported by XipH).

Releasing OGM sources (and so its complete specs, and all the tools Tobias built around - especially his set of DShow filters) may make some people will try and keep on enhancing this 'non-official' format while XipH wants (if they still plan to do this) a new official system.

tiki4

25th June 2003, 16:38

I know Xiph is developing Theora, but do you really think they want to put down all the work Tobias spent creating his directshow filters? Maybe Xiph comes up with something backward compatible to OGM. Breaking compatibility to OGM wouldn't be very clever as many people around here are using that format, and considerable work by you and many others was put into that.

Cheers,

tiki4

[ah, and thanks for your wonderful tools (same goes to Koepi of course)]

Suiryc

25th June 2003, 20:26

Well someone from XipH stated that they was planning to do something totally different than OGM ... then people started asking for the filters to be backward compatible (i.e. that their filters could read OGM since a lot of people uses it already and have burnt CD with such files). So someone from XipH (don't recall who exactly) said that indeed even if their new system wasn't compatible (i.e. using the same specs as a basis at least) they would certainly make it possible to read OGM files in the tools they would develop around it.

outlyer

25th June 2003, 20:35

I recommend reading this past thread (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?threadid=42331), maybe some things have changed since, but most of us don't know much more than this

ChristianHJW

25th June 2003, 23:08

Originally posted by outlyer
I recommend reading this past thread (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?threadid=42331), maybe some things have changed since, but most of us don't know much more than this

ouch, that hurts. This thread didnt develop all too well, but what we can state today is

- current Ogg Theora specs and alpha2 implementations are completely incompatible with OGM. That doesnt mean they couldnt be added later, i just mention this here for the sake of completeness.

- after this long time there is still no sign of Tobias' OggDS code on the Xiph CVS, for whatever reasons. Latest news comes from Jack Moffit when i contacted him about CoreVorbis, he telling me that he is in contact with Tobias ( again ? ) and the sources will go online soon.

- Xiph people themselves dont even offer a DSF for Ogg Vorbis yet ( they could have made one ), and i really wonder if we will see one from them for Ogg Theora. The making of such a DSF for matroska is one of the major reasons for slow development of the container BTW, as robux4 has to learn this stuff from scratch and Gabest' prefers to work for himself ....

- matroska is not 1.0 yet and a lot of things have to be refined still, but its working already, and people even start using it already.

outlyer

25th June 2003, 23:20

Originally posted by ChristianHJW
ouch, that hurts. This thread didnt develop all too well, but what we can state today is
well, it did, but there's also some interesting info

tiki4

26th June 2003, 07:59

@ChristianHJW:

Hehe, just waiting for chapter support...

tiki4

Atamido

26th June 2003, 09:28

Here is the quote from Emmett about future support of OGM from Xiph:Here's a snippet from an E-mail from Monty to myself:

"These files [OGM] will probably end up working just fine in OggFile, once that's up."

Chill out. Relax. Breathe in, breathe out. All is right with the world, and it is a beautiful day. There are no immediate or even long-term plans to screw with what currently works.

Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation So, even though Emmett is no longer the ?CEO?, it looks like Monty had intentions of offering Ogm support.