nesdev.org

Which video format would be "better" for posting updates to my emulator site? I have two best options right now that work best with the VGA frame grabber that I'm using. WMV format using Windows media encoder. Or an XVID-based AVI format using the software that came with my frame grabber.

Is one a much better option than the other or doesn't it really matter? I think both formats are pretty popular/common myself but I'm wondering what everyone else thinks.

If someone wants to suggest another format/codec that's fine but I can't promise that I will be able to generate it.

Pz!

Jonathon

With YouTube and such video sites, I rarely bother downloading videos to watch locally unless it's something I'm really interested in.

So are you saying flash would be best then?

I think Flash Media Encoder is free. I could try that too I suppose....if that's what you're recommending.

Lossless H.264 is a good intermediate format, and can be encoded using ffdshow/ffvfw, but that's probably not supported by your frame grabber software.

While XviD, or MPEG-4 ASP, is probably more widely supported, H.264 does produce higher quality encodes for similar bitrate, or lower bitrate for similar quality. Although if you do decide to go with H.264, do not use the Flash Media Encoder to compress it, the included H.264 encoder is absolute crap.

The recommended encoder for H.264 is x264, and I also recommend sticking with the default encoding profile of "medium" and only adjusting the target bitrate, or even just using a quantizer quality level instead. Higher quality presets can take anywhere from 2x to 50x as long to encode, and probably for an unnoticeable improvement in quality.

jwdonal wrote:So are you saying flash would be best then?

I don't think YouTube videos look particularly good, but if the general public is anything like me, they won't download AVI or WMV files of something they're not sure is interesting, but if you embed a YouTube video most of them would click the PLAY button.

So I'm saying that whatever CODEC you use (and I've heard that H.264 uploaded to YouTube works great for games), make sure you make it available at YouTube as well, or anything else that requires just a click to watch.

I think you and kode54 are providing some sound advice. I tend to agree (now that I think about) most people just wanna CLICK PLAY.

I guess I will go learn how to post H.264 videos to youtube then.

In case you hadn't noticed I'm a total NEWB when it comes to encoding audio/video and posting it on the web.

Anymore suggestions/advice/tips are certainly welcome.

Thanks!

Jonathon

I haven't encoded anything with H.264 myself, but I'm sure it won't be hard to find an encoder, it seems very popular nowadays. Once you have the encoded file, posting it on YouTube is dead easy.

All MPEG-4 ASP encoders (including Xvid) and all H.264 encoders (including x264) have one drawback: patents. Theora video doesn't have this drawback.

YouTube has one drawback: it likes to roll over to fraudulent OCILLA takedowns by overzealous copyright owners, especially if your video makes fair use of a copyrighted work.

tepples wrote:All MPEG-4 ASP encoders (including Xvid) and all H.264 encoders (including x264) have one drawback: patents. Theora video doesn't have this drawback.

"From what I can see the main objection to Theora is the submarine patent issue. Theora is not 'patent-free'. Rather all known patents relating to it have been released to the public. Submarine patents are those which are unknown. They refer to the practice of keeping quiet about a patent on a technology until some company with a large amount of money implements it. Then the patent holder surfaces and attempts to get large amounts of money for it." - BLUISH CODER

More here
and
A Dev of x264 talking about how On2 was not the only company with patents on Theora

Personally I don't think Theora is the way to go in terms of being open and free use, but DIRAC.

Bluish Coder wrote:keeping quiet about a patent on a technology until some company with a large amount of money implements it.

Bluish Coder's post is from two years ago, and since then, "companies have already exposed themselves to this risk because they ship [Theora] based systems." Chrome plays Theora video, and Google Inc. has a large amount of money. Firefox plays Theora video, and Mozilla Corp. has a large amount of money flowing in from an AdSense for Search deal with Google. You snooze, you lose.

HJRodrigo wrote:Personally I don't think Theora is the way to go in terms of being open and free use, but DIRAC.

Comparison shows that Dirac is not there yet. Even MPEG-2, the archaic codec used on DVD Video, trounces it.

Video for everybody.

http://camendesign.com/code/video_for_everybody

jwdonal wrote:Location: USA, NM

The "video for everybody" method appears to involve paying MPEG-LA per viewer that doesn't use the .ogv.

tepples wrote: Bluish Coder's post is from two years ago, and since then, "companies have already exposed themselves to this risk because they ship [Theora] based systems." Chrome plays Theora video, and Google Inc. has a large amount of money. Firefox plays Theora video, and Mozilla Corp. has a large amount of money flowing in from an AdSense for Search deal with Google. You snooze, you lose.

I was just clarifying the patent issue with Theora, as many people are unaware On2 did not own all the patents on VP3. There are at least two known companies that have patents that never released their patents and heaven knows how many submarine ones are out there (Although this is true and a risk with any software). I think I read somewhere that the xiph foundation is/was trying to secure any/all possible patents that they do not own. I have no link for that info so I could be remembering it wrong. BTW it would not be the web browser companies at main risk but companies selling/releasing videos in the specified video format. If major companies released movies and such in Theora we could easily get widespread adoption, but the problem is that they have no guarantees that they would not get in trouble down the road. Personally I think it is just pointless paranoid fears, but of course it is not like I am putting my money on the line. Good thing about Dirac is that it has already had some adoption in terms of major HD broadcasting (Beijing Olympics), which to my knowledge has not happened with Theora. Companies are more likely to back Dirac if it is used more in broadcasting.

[quote=""tepples"]Comparison shows that Dirac is not there yet. Even MPEG-2, the archaic codec used on DVD Video, trounces it.[/quote]

Unfortunately all current wavelet video encoders suck compared to DTCs, but at least Dirac has the most promise, if fully implemented in a well done encoder. It maybe able to even compete realistically with x264, but I might be way too optimistic here. Theora/VP3 will never be able to realistically compete with a well done H 264 encoder in terms of quality over compression, although it can beat crappy encoders like apple's easily (But so can Xvid). Google recently brought On2, so maybe if they open VP8 like was done to VP3 (many speculate that this was Google's plan to begin with), we might get a free/open video format that is a realistic rival to H.264. Widespread adoption would also be easy as Google owns youtube and can just release all videos as VP8s

This is all pretty interesting stuff.

Is there any particular format that lends itself better to being able to to insert little title screens in between captures? Can someone suggest a software package?

For example, I want to record the output (audio and video) from my NES-FPGA using my frame grabber and my sound card. I would record the output of one ROM, pause capture, swap ROMs, record the output the new ROM, pause capture, and so on...to make one single file.

Then I would like to be able to insert just a few second title screen in between each ROM capture that has a short little description of which ROM it is and what it tests (or something like that). If I can figure out what tools to use and how to do this I think I will pretty much have everything I need for all of my NES progress updates from here on out! Can someone point me in the right direction? I don't need anything fancy. A free option is of course the nicest option, but I'm willing to pay as well.

Thanks for all the info guys!

Jonathon

jwdonal wrote:I would like to be able to insert just a few second title screen in between each ROM capture that has a short little description of which ROM it is and what it tests (or something like that).

Pretty much anything can do this. Heck, you can tell ffmpeg, a command-line video transcoder, to cut images & video with enough CLI variables.

My personal recommendation would be one of the "top dogs" in video editing, like Adobe Premiere or Sony Vegas, where they do have basic splicing & overlays built in, but can be taken further if needed down the road.

If you're looking for a free solution, Windows has a movie maker built in that can do that (and gets a pretty bad rep because of how it 'works').

If you are looking for a free solution other than WMM I've had some sucess with a little program called avidemux in the past for basic copy pasta stuff.

There's of course better free tools, but just for splicing titles I've found it's best to keep it as basic as possible, without limiting yourself too much.