good points
I don't think it would be a _bad_ idea to support server side
transcoding it ofcourse gives more flexibility to have the original file
and then let us target different output formats in the future. Would let
us support camera video uploads etc.
But there are logistical issues.
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
This does
client side transcoding, but as far as the user can tell it's all done
by the server except no long transmission time for his 14gbyte DV
movie. (although, perhaps a long transcoding time. :) )
Remember to add some message like 'Uploading a low-res
Platonides wrote:
Remember to add some message like 'Uploading a low-res version. Keep the
original if you want it full-res for the future.' We don't want anyone
thinking 'I uploaded this 14GB file. Now I can delete as they keep a
copy.' without fully understanding it. Some people deleted
Mike Baynton asked about some server side transcoding code he has worked
on this seems appropriate for wikitech-l so I have cc'ed it here.
The current direction is to encourage in-browser client side
transcoding. This offloads the costs of server side transcoding and
maximizes quality letting
The current direction is to encourage in-browser client side
transcoding. This offloads the costs of server side transcoding
and
maximizes quality letting us supply the transcode settings for
generating theora files from the HD or DV source. Instead of
users
uploading intermediary format at low
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:05 PM, Mike.lifeguard
mikelifegu...@fastmail.fm wrote:
[snip]
into the appropriate derivative files. This is certainly a lot
easier than asking the user to do it (most have no sweet clue,
and even experienced users are in over their head),
You're missing a major
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
This does
client side transcoding, but as far as the user can tell it's all done
by the server except no long transmission time for his 14gbyte DV
movie. (although, perhaps a long transcoding time. :) )
At some talks here a FOMS (foundations of open source media)
