Frage von JMitch:
S.alle Hello!
Possibly. knows one or the other readers of the
ffmpegprojekt?
Wir suchen Entwickler (C-Programmierer), die interesiert sind s.dem besten freien Videocodec für die kommenden Jahr (
snow) to work. Actually he already is running, but unfortunately there is no fixed specification. And without that you can not be the codec for video material that you would like to archive.
And that is exactly me. I need an open source, patent-free, and royalty-free video codec, for all common operating systems (Windows, Linux, Mac) is available. It can be used as synonymous lossy and lossless compression behind H.264 does not hide!
Therefore I ask here in the forum, if anyone wants help or can donate something.
Unfortunately I am not a programmer and understand little of mathematics. That's why I prefer donated.
Thank you and sunny greetings
Lars
Antwort von TheBubble:
Yes, I have heard of it. But what is your question to (lossless) video codecs, except that you say that you have a need?
Antwort von JMitch:
Hi,
my hope is that someone in this forum mitliest who can help develop the codec. Or someone who one knows, one knows that ...
Or someone who for the Project would like to donate something.
Simply ensure that the development continues. Because the codec in its present condition is already so good that he is worth to be further developed.
The current "maintainer" has little desire to continue it
alone, but if someone adopts it, it's next.
So far, so bad ;-(
Regards
Lars
Antwort von TheBubble:
I am interested, in fact, very much for video codecs. However, I wonder, among other things, whether it is worthwhile for me in a already at an advanced stage project is to cooperate as a leisure activity. Do not misunderstand me, I find it very interesting new codec ideas (and I do sometimes synonymous), but it should stop synonymous for me something new and interesting to come out, if you invested leisure.
The codec depends apparently of a different project from what is not with Visual C + + to build it and I have found no version synonymous, as VfW or DirectShow codec works.
Antwort von JMitch:
Hello.
As far as I know, the codec in ffdshow for Windows with it. But of Windows, I have only a limited idea.
The Ffmpegprojekt is written in C99, as far as I know. In any case, the programmer is trying to keep s.diesen standard.
Maybe the codec for you but interesting, when I write that it relates to a coding using wavelets based (similar to Dirac of the BBC)?
Thanks anyway.
Regards
Lars
Antwort von TheBubble:
As far as I know, the codec in ffdshow for Windows with it. But of Windows, I have only a limited idea.
Yes, he is in the overall project is not isolated as a codec DLL, for example with VfW interface. If someone actually the codec to use (and it seriously is to be tested), it must be with existing video editing applications can work together and use it mostly DirectShow, VfW and QuickTime codec. If the Project purely experiementell should be, of course it is synonymous without, but s.einem some point it would be with support for common interfaces just beautiful, so a codec really synonymous times can be used.
The Ffmpegprojekt is written in C99, as far as I know. In any case, the programmer is trying to keep s.diesen standard.
According to the documentation may not be the overall Project with Visual C + + will be built, but only with gcc. This unfortunately prevents the use of presumably widespread s.weitesten C / C + + IDE for Windows. Synonymous, but I must admit that I just did not really want to, the "alternative" build process, since I have to once again things have to download and setup, which I otherwise probably under Windows no longer needed.
Maybe the codec for you but interesting, when I write that it relates to a coding using wavelets based (similar to Dirac of the BBC)?
Wavelets make things more interesting cars;)
Why are you so s.einer interested in further development of this codec?
Antwort von JMitch:
Hi Bubble,
why I s.der further development of this codec'm interested?
I have actually already written, or you know a codec, which combines all of the following characteristics:
- Linzenzfrei available
- Runs under Windows, Mac OS and Unix (at least playable)
- Very efficient (the ratio of quality to compression rate)
- Free
- Open source
- Patented
These properties are for me important because of the codec for the long-term archiving of my private family videos is intended.
I want the videos synonymous in 30 years can still watch. And my grandchildren should be synonymous, although this is probably illosorisch.
For audio, I Vorbis and unpack everything into a Matroskakontainer. Possibly. is synonymous times than container NUT interesting.
I would not just of companies like Microsoft or Apple or organizations such as MPEG or Frauenhofer dependent.
These are reasons enough, right?
Regards
Lars
Antwort von JMitch:
I once again,
I have a password:
- Future proof for the next 5-x years
This means that the codec on the Height of the time or maybe even a little ahead of his. So I can be relatively sure that in the coming years is not forced to revert to something else umzuschwenken. Even large companies will probably not for the ordinary consumer to bring affordable, which is much better.
Regards
Lars
Antwort von TheBubble:
These are reasons enough, right?
But these are no reasons for everything, when a motivation is to make something new, perhaps even better than previously available, too. You basically do not want new, better codec, but something free, open source, ...
What long-term archiving is concerned, I suspect it will be in 30 years, still be possible, a player for common MPEG files available to be quite unverbreitet because this format is not so today, especially since it synonymous in the professional environment is used. I would rather think about the appropriate storage medium and match players, as well as a concept by which the data periodically to new storage medium will copy.
Antwort von JMitch:
Hi Bubble,
the new codec should not necessarily, but if he promises good, I like him.
Free and open source are important. Open source can I get MPEG [24] synonymous. However, should I make one (or two) license (s) have. The Motion Pictures Expert Group lives of these payments.
Too bad I would not MPEG2 or MPEG4.
However, MPEG4 AVC so many Klimmzüge to maintain a good compression to make me a transparent waveletbasierter codec already prefer. There's unlike H.264 even more potential there.
That with the storage medium is really a topic that I always synonymous think again. That with the Aspielgeräten is not quite so bad, because I do not my videos s.Fernsehern would like to view. Everything is s.Computer (projector) views (are). Hence the openness of the source codecs. Den can easily be synonymous in 30 years to compile, as a DVD player zusammenzulöten.
The storage medium with the avoiding me with different file-level backups on different media. So far, I have with this concept had no losses, although some media has failed.
Regards
Lars
Antwort von TheBubble:
Free and open source are important. Why?
Perhaps you should explain a few things out, what you really want to do (so far focused on Home Video selbstgefilmte for future grandchildren, right?), In which output format the videos are available at all and why bought players and encoders for you is not in question, which for your application s.den other currently available codecs and suspend what is this one so special codec for your application makes.
Den can easily be synonymous in 30 years to compile, as a DVD player zusammenzulöten.
This will show in 30 years. Here, I give no better prognosis, because so little depends of many factors.
Antwort von JMitch:
Hi Bubble!
I am trying the times apart.
Perhaps you should explain a few things out, what you really want to do (so far focused on Home Video selbstgefilmte for future grandchildren, right?)
Precisely that self-made movies for eternity preserve. How well it just goes. As they say, to the best knowledge and belief. ;-)
in which output format the videos are available at all
Everything possible, what your camcorder and photo Knipsen so hergeben:
[list] MJPEG to AVI
DIVX to mp4
DV
MPEG2 in TS [/ list: u: 68ad173300]
And different audio format.
and why bought players and encoders for you do not come into question,
Because I am not of the version to version of my operating system can take. Mainly, I work under Linux. Even for Windows, I would have probably every few years to buy new software. Why should I voluntarily readiness?
In addition,
"pay" I am the
snow codec with my significant
donation. And then synonymous nor all people of this planet to be good, the internet connection s.einen approaching!
In what ways is a commercial codec better?
what your application s.den other currently available codecs is suspended
They are rarely open source and forced to (license) payments, without which one really buys something, it belongs to one. Previously, this was so:
I walk into a store and buy a cup that belongs to me then. Today I buy software rights. But the software does not belongs to me. I like that and not quite!
With open source software under (L) GPL has an unfettered right. Simply more rights for less money.
and what this one so special codec for your application makes.
He is
[list] open source
freely copyable
for various operating systems (including Linux) available
Royalty-free
pate freely
for archival purposes, could be used
[/ list: u: 68ad173300]
That's nothing special?
Free and open source are important.
Why?
Is clear now, right?
What interests you so s.diesen principle arguments?
Why do you mean that a commercial codec would be better?
Why should we discuss why an open source, kostenlsoer codec is better?
Why should you have a very good, not generally available codec support, if you can?
If it bothers you that you have the codec in Windows can not use it as you want, but find someone who is in the codec VfW Your tag? The power may not have VLC so?
ffdshow and VLC and other programs are based on ffmpeg and its development. Is not that synonymous a good reason for a possible support for you?
Regards
Lars
Antwort von TheBubble:
What interests you so s.diesen principle arguments?
Because I had hoped unfounded suspicion that you just about the principles of free software, and you all rest in (commercial) Software reject.
Basically, I'm going to recommend that the original files are kept (no preference which format, if possible synonymous the original media, such as DV tapes) and chopped films in each output format. Other Formats and then also not replacing the original data to create.
Homemade movies preserved for eternity. How well it just goes.
About the preservation of digital content do you already (and you will do even more), thoughts. It would be seen whether this video -/Filmdaten a general standard prevails. Helps you now of course not immediately next, but the problem is known s.sich.
Because I am not of the version to version of my operating system can take.
Depends on the OS and the time duration. But will leave that, I know that Linux is here sometimes problematic.
Why should you have a very good, not generally available codec support, if you can?
I have no objection. I just wanted some points which I hope for a successful long-term archiving for valuable consideration think (and for home use yet affordable and feasible, at least initially). Perhaps make one final thought: If you like it with the data is really important, then put on more than one format, for the purpose are appropriate.
How did they have responded to your donation? I suspect that this does not happen often.
Antwort von JMitch:
Hi Bubble,
What interests you so s.diesen principle arguments?
Because I had hoped unfounded suspicion that you just about the principles of free software, and you all rest in (commercial) Software reject.
I have realized that non-software is a good alternative to commercial is. I live privately since 1997 very well with only free software. Work is still different. Principles are that already.
But that was not me, but mainly to provide support for this codec.
Because I am not of the version to version of my operating system can take.
Depends on the OS and the time duration. But will leave that, I know that Linux is here sometimes problematic.
I have the opposite experience. Precisely because of the open source software, I can easily ancient running. Even on old hardware. Programs for Win9x, however I know some who no longer run on XP or the manufacturer no longer exist.
But the artet faith in a war I am afraid.
How did they have responded to your donation? See
hier.
hier.
hier.
