Slashdot Mirror


Encoding Video For Mobile Devices?

MadGeek007 writes "I am developing an app for Android that will use many short (averaging 10-20 minutes) instructional videos. Unfortunately, I know next to nothing about encoding video. I'd like to use a codec that is supported by Android and iOS out-of-the-box. I need the videos to look decent on large mobile displays (IPhone 4, HTC EVO, etc.), and still be able to stream well on a good 3G connection. The sound quality is also important. With so many different display resolutions on mobile devices, do I need to encode multiple copies of the same video? Or can I get away with a one-size-fits-all video? Can anyone recommend encoding software, codecs, resolutions, and bitrates that would work best for this application?"

177 comments

  1. Handbrake by jacoplane · · Score: 5, Informative

    Handbrake is what I use:

    http://handbrake.fr/

    1. Re:Handbrake by SquarePixel · · Score: 5, Informative

      That and output as H.264 which is really the only choice.

    2. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I also use handbrake. I don't own a smartphone so I'm going from guess work here.

      Video codec i would go with h264, that is pretty much the standard right now. Handbrake uses x264 by default. You can get advanced and pass specific options to x264 via handbrake. However some players don't support advanced x264 features. I would start with the apple presets and work from there.

      Audio codec mp3 or aac. The rate varies, i would say ~160 for mp3 and ~128 for aac. Again trial and error will work best. Mixdown stereo, i wouldn't putz with any of the dolby features.

      Screen resolution is an issue I am completley guessing at. I'm assuming That the players scale resolution up or down. So I would render one low def, and one high def. I don't know the phones aspect ratios. High def being near evo 4g quality low def being errm low. You could possibly just do one medium definition but I don't know if the players will choke on higher resolutions.

      For encoding video you have several choices
      Target Size, Bitrate, or constant Quality.

      Target Size usually looks like crap in my experience.

      Bitrate allows finer grained control but you really should do 2 passes on it for better quality. So in turn it takes longer.

      Constant quality works at variable bit rates to my understanding, and it only requires one pass. This is what I use. I rip all my dvds at RF=23. Lower number is higher quality. Due a couple small clips to figure out end size. But i would recommend starting with constant quality.

    3. Re:Handbrake by imbaczek · · Score: 1, Informative

      mod parent up! also, use a nightly build for extra x264 goodness.

    4. Re:Handbrake by krick-zero · · Score: 2, Informative

      Fair Use Wizard is pretty decent.

      It costs money, but they released a free full version 2.8 a while back that you can still find on this page...

      http://www.videohelp.com/tools/FairUse_Wizard

    5. Re:Handbrake by bemymonkey · · Score: 2, Informative

      Android's support of H.264 is surprisingly good. As a content provider, it's hard to go wrong for any iPhone or Android phone with H.264.

      Consumers, on the other hand, get the short end of the stick... those hundreds of gigs of DivX everyone has laying around are useless on many Android devices, and even software-based decoder-players aren't enough because they need max CPU permanently, draining the battery nearly as fast as Flash on an iPhone (at least according to Steve Jobs :p)...

    6. Re:Handbrake by sortius_nod · · Score: 1, Funny

      Well, that killed the discussion, can't go past Handbrake. In fact, if you read past this post, you're wasting your time.

      There are many like it, but Handbrake is the best.

    7. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      those hundreds of gigs of DivX everyone has laying around are useless

      And that's because pirate groups insist on using an obsolete format based on a container that's more than two decades old.

      Hint to those in "the scene": fuck DivX and fuck MKV, start using H.264+AAC in standard mp4 containers.

    8. Re:Handbrake by King+InuYasha · · Score: 0

      Fuck MP4 container. MKV all the way!

      DivX is a bad choice no matter which way you slice it.

    9. Re:Handbrake by jedidiah · · Score: 0

      divx is a nice format if you happen to be encoding stuff.

      It's 10 times faster than h264.

      For transient data, it doesn't really make sense to use the single most expensive format out there. None of these devices are capable of playing archival quality video files anyways so there's no point in pretending.

      Sure, the quality will be lower but it's a small device with a small screen so it really doesn't matter in the end.

      OTOH, an HD divx file is something that an older machine has some hope of decoding.

      The entire world should not be forced into h264 just because some ignorant people don't believe in using different tools for different jobs.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    10. Re:Handbrake by stms · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not If you use 0.9.3 it supports xvid as well. At any rate Gordian Knot is a bit better than handbrake though slightly more complicated to use. http://sourceforge.net/projects/gordianknot/

    11. Re:Handbrake by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Basically use Apple's devices as the lowest common denominator as they tend to be the most picky.

      Generate h264 mp4 files with mp3 audio.

      As others have said, Handbrake has nice presets for this.

      If you try to futz with individual h264 settings on your own you will probably generate something that is unplayable on Apple devices.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    12. Re:Handbrake by ThePengwin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That is why AutoGK was made (http://www.autogk.me.uk/) However, going through the more complicated process gives you more options.

    13. Re:Handbrake by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      Why would I redownload/reencode all the stuff I already have?

      Sure, I wouldn't mind getting new stuff in H264 mp4/m4v right away, but I've got a lot of stuff I encoded or downloaded a long time ago, and redownloading and/or reencoding all of it would be pretty much out of the question...

    14. Re:Handbrake by jo_ham · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Who is the ignorant one? He asked specifically for a format supported by both Android and iOS4 - that pretty much means h.264 unless he delivers two different videos to the two platforms, and if you can get decent performance from one format that both support, why bother to make it hard for yourself? Presumably you will also want to target hardware video decoders where possible, which also lends itself to h.264.

      If the ideology behind using a format other than h.264 is that strong, he shouldn't be developing for iOS 4 in the first place.

    15. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except on nearly all devices H.264 is hardware decoded and DivX may not be. H.264 gives better picture quality, smaller sizes and your battery will last longer and play smoother.

      The only thing you've got for DivX is it takes less time to encode. Since the encoding happens once and the playback occurs (for others) many more times it seems short sighted to use something like DivX.

    16. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Wait wait wait stop your trolling and state some facts first. MKV is just a file container... not a codec...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matroska

    17. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AFAIK there's no such thing as "mp4 files with mp3 audio". It's either MPEG-4 or H.264 video and AAC audio, inside an .mp4 container.

    18. Re:Handbrake by cynyr · · Score: 2, Informative

      only reason i disagree with you is i have 2 devices at home that will play mkv's, both are computers(PCs running vlc/mplayer). All of my portables and other devices(most importantly my ps3) won't play anything inside a mkv even if it is a compatible video/audio stream. Also i've had no luck doing "ffmpeg -i dumb.mkv -ac copy -vc copy useful.mp4". I always get some sort of error, about not being able to pack the h264 video into the mp4. I haven't tried, ripping them out, and then using mp4box, or ffmpeg to put them back together.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    19. Re:Handbrake by King+InuYasha · · Score: 1

      I usually don't use FFmpeg to create MKVs. I usually choose to mux the MKVs myself using mkvmerge. However, I believe Handbrake generates good MKVs as well, though I'm not completely certain on it, since I don't use Handbrake.

    20. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why fuck MKV ? MKV is a very good and flexible container which supports many different codecs. The tools are very good and it has a pretty wide support base. All of my devices support it out the box.

    21. Re:Handbrake by DMalic · · Score: 1

      Many devices can output to TV. Say you have 1 mbps video; with x264 this might look reasonably close to DVD quality, with xVid it'll be blurry and nasty.

    22. Re:Handbrake by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is why you should store all of your movies in a lossless format somewhere and then just re-encode them for yout portable devices ;-)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    23. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's kind of hard when the DVD/Blu-Ray discs already aren't lossless.

    24. Re:Handbrake by teh31337one · · Score: 2, Informative

      Consumers, on the other hand, get the short end of the stick... those hundreds of gigs of DivX everyone has laying around are useless on many Android devices, and even software-based decoder-players aren't enough because they need max CPU permanently, draining the battery nearly as fast as Flash on an iPhone (at least according to Steve Jobs :p)...

      My Samsung Galaxy S i9000 android phone (European version) plays DivX natively, without any dropped frames. :D

    25. Re:Handbrake by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      FormatFactory is probably an easier choice to get into for a beginner because it features built-in optimized settings for vast majority of phones. Not just Android/Iphone but many other makers like Nokia, Samsung, Sony Eriksson etc.

      www.pcfreetime.com

      It's yet another ffmpeg frontend, but it supports far more output options then handbrake that went h.264 only this year. Personally I use it also because it allows very easy handling of subtitles in addition to wide device support.

    26. Re:Handbrake by mykro76 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Fuck MP4, it can't even handle subtitles. Renders most media centres including Apple TV almost useless. The pirate groups were right to choose MKV, but then they don't even bother to rip the subs. wtf?

    27. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Here's a crazy idea, provide a picture link to your videos that you upload to YouTube.com instead of trying to encode them in? Feel free to bash the idea, but I find it a simplistic way to solve the situation without doing a lot of work. Most phones come with a Youtube app preinstalled.

    28. Re:Handbrake by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      Jeddiah have a point though, on a daily basis there are little reason to use your biggest hammer for even the small jobs.

      In the case of this thread though, there are really no other option than h.264, as that is the format of choice between high-end smart-phones. I have no idea how Android or iPhone handles 3gp, but then again, that format is not exactly a high performer in any quality category anyway.

      The main stumbling block is to decide which bandwidth, and frame size to use, and then perhaps chose the size for the target phone that does the poorest job of rescaling.

    29. Re:Handbrake by JavaBear · · Score: 2, Informative

      I prefer MKV, simply because it is one of the few to support an entire video package, with multiple audio tracks, subtitles and chapter marks.

    30. Re:Handbrake by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      I do believe that the MP4 container can handle MP3, if not there are always AC3 as well.

    31. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, sir, "format supported by both android and ios" is what the discussion was about 5 posts ago, before the topic drifted into bashing pirates and their formats.

    32. Re:Handbrake by arivanov · · Score: 1

      While I agree with you regarding DivX I do not quite see your point on Matroska. MKV is Google's choice for VP8 standard so "scene" aside it is likely to be the _NATIVE_ container of choice in the next Android. It is not supported on the iPhone of course.

      As far as the actual settings for iPhone, PSP, etc they are in the ffmpeg wiki. The first gen Iphones can barely do a 1.2Mbit stream at 320x240. Newer ones are OK and the iPad can play a native SD stream. As far as encoding the video my rule of thumb is to encode at about 20-25% of the res, chosing the bitrate by trial and error until I get good picture most of the time. For example 480x272 scaled up is more than enough for playing on 1024x768, it takes _MUCH_ less CPU than 1024x768 at low bitrate.

      Unfortunately, applying this rule of thumb to the current crop of phones results in 1MB-1.5MB streams. That is not stream-able over 3G. Unless you are sitting on top of a HSPA tower you cannot stream such a video reliably. So you have to go down in res and it will look horrible.

      There is a reason why Jobs insists on doing Facetime on WiFi only and it is very simple. It will not work with the resolution of iPhone 4 on 3G.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    33. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should check before you bash... cause MP4 handles subtitles perfectly :) I know cause when I rip DVD's with Handbrake for my iPod and I tell it to include subtitles I later see the subtitles just fine when I turn it on on the iPod ;)
      Quicktime also handles it, VLC handles it... maybe you just suck?

    34. Re:Handbrake by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      Lossless? We're talking about video here, not audio... even Blu-Ray is lossy.

      Of course, that would be ideal... but when you've got a fully catalogued and sorted collection filled with DivX, why would you want to re-rip everything? The quality of the original DVDs hasn't gotten any better, and the ONLY thing that won't play the damned things natively is my Android phone...

    35. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      H264 is good commpresions and video streaming. IS used to CCTV Circuits.Ordis Sisteme de securitate

    36. Re:Handbrake by gig · · Score: 1

      > Consumers, on the other hand, get the short end of the stick... those hundreds of gigs of DivX everyone has laying around are useless

      You have it backwards. H.264 enables consumers to choose video playback, video capture, and video editing tools from any manufacturer and still have universal compatibility. They can still create and share video with anyone, they can still purchase commercial video from any source and it all works. And it does all that entirely for free. That is the benefit of standardization. That is why ISO MPEG-4 H.264 exists in the first place.

      DivX and other non-standard codecs are what give consumers the "short end of the stick." They require you to maintain a collection of software codecs, they require huge CPU resources, and they require you to transcode in order to accomplish any kind of sharing. So if you have a collection of videos stored in a nonstandard codec, your best option is to encode them in H.264 so you can play them on standard video players.

    37. Re:Handbrake by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      Yes everybody is dying to reencode all their stuff, losing quality, under a codec which is more CPU intensive, and having MPEG LA dictating the terms for simply viewing them, or ANY reencoding of them.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    38. Re:Handbrake by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Well, that killed the discussion, can't go past Handbrake. In fact, if you read past this post, you're wasting your time.

      You have got to be kidding. If there was an ask Slashdot "what is 2 + 2?" you'd still get a lot of different answers. And quite rightly, too.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    39. Re:Handbrake by FooBarWidget · · Score: 1

      Thank you! I've been looking for a tool that handles MKV subtitles correctly. Handbrake doesn't support burning in MKV subtitles but it seems to work perfectly with this tool.

    40. Re:Handbrake by ma3382 · · Score: 1

      I am not sure what the limitations of the Youtube app are, but this is my experience. Not all videos on the Youtube.com search will display on the Youtube app search. I have a Nexus One with Android 2.2 running Flash and I can see many more youtube.com videos than Youtube app videos. Also, when my phone asks me if I want to load a Youtube.com video into Browser or Youtube App, the Youtube app will tell me 'This video is not available for mobile devices.' I have seen this happen quite frequently with videos I want to watch.

    41. Re:Handbrake by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      Maybe he doesn't want the videos to be released in the (de facto) public domain? Sure, borrowing their compression, storage, and CDN skills would save a lot of time and money, but if you ever hoped to make money off of the videos you are publishing then youtube probably isn't the way to go.

    42. Re:Handbrake by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Whoosh!

      (Geez guys, I even put a sarcastic smiley at the end)

      On a separate, more serious, note, just be happy that in the longer term, this issue will disappear anyway. Mobile CPUs are getting more powerful, flash drives are getting bigger and costing less. Algorithms concerning soon-to-be public-domain standards like MPEG-1 are getting better and better. Realistically, in five years you can have a hard drive full of high quality 1080p MPEG-1 movies, knowing you can copy them as-is to your portable device, and there'll be the storage space to store them, and enough CPU power to comfortably decode them without sucking batteries.

      Just a shame we're in this temporary transition time when we have to use hardware decoding to save batteries, and have to use patent encumbered standards to ensure we have enough space to store content, and have to pre-scale content to fit the destination device to save both.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    43. Re:Handbrake by kiwix · · Score: 1

      If you plan to make any kind of money (even through advertising) with your app, then you probably need a professional license for H264 which is quite expensive. And even if you don't make money, you're supposed to use a licensed encoder, meaning not x264.

      Welcome to the wonderful world of software patents.

    44. Re:Handbrake by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Well it all depends on how long you want to wait for your result.

      Really. What part of 10 TIMES FASTER did you not understand?

      Of course, as others have said: It's all moot since Apple doesn't support anything but h264.

      My comment was directed at the typical Apple fanboy cult approach to anything not done in a manner blessed by Apple.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    45. Re:Handbrake by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Well then, isn't the mp4 container TERRIBLY LAME.

      This explains why MKV is the Handbrake default for the High Quality preset in Handbrake.

      This all comes back to "how lame is Apple".

      You really do have to be careful about what they will and won't allow because combinations that seem obvious to everyone else will be disallowed by Apple even if the system in question is capable of dealing with the individual pieces and parts and the resulting aggregate. What Apple devices allow for will likely be your limiting factor in what you produce.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    46. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What part of 10 TIMES FASTER did you not understand? ...
      My comment was directed at the typical Apple fanboy cult approach to anything not done in a manner blessed by Apple."

      A typical fanboy would be using FCP and it's Compressor to encode. He'd use both his desktop and laptop to do the encoding via Compressor's ability to divide the task up to all connected computers. So he'd easily have 6 or more cores working on it. And if he is really a fanboy, he'd have another desktop lying around from a previous upgrade making that 3 computers to encode the task.

    47. Re:Handbrake by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      In the case of this thread though, there are really no other option than h.264, as that is the format of choice between high-end smart-phones. I have no idea how Android or iPhone handles 3gp, but then again, that format is not exactly a high performer in any quality category anyway.

      Most "featurephones" do h.264 as well. Using h.264 is a misnomer since it spans a quality continuum from 160x120 through 1080p and beyond. Most higher end phones can do VGA on h.264 easily.

      3gp is a container format. It's a subset of the mp4 container format. Which is a subset of the mov container format (Apple QuickTime). Anything that plays mp4 should handle 3gp easily as the real difference is codec support. Most mp4 parsers understand MOV as well because it's not that much extra work (and Apple's documented MOV anyhow). 3gp can hold quality videos, but since most devices producing them are featurephones with their crappy-cam sensors and fleapower CPUs that can barely do CIF resolution in real time, nevermind QVGA.

    48. Re:Handbrake by h3 · · Score: 1

      Actually, subtitles are in the spec : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4_Part_14 and
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4_Part_17

      Support is pretty shoddy though :(

    49. Re:Handbrake by Golias · · Score: 1

      I would counter that format requirements will continue to go up as available tech improves, but the truth is that I ***still*** have not bothered with Blu-Ray at all, and even lossy 1/4 HD rips of Doctor Who look pretty good on my high-def projection system, let alone my tiny iPhone screen. As we already have with audio, we're rapidly reaching a point where most consumers simply aren't going to care about fidelity improvements enough to invest in near-future new technologies.

      The screen already looks good to me in 720p or 1080i or even 640p (sometimes less). Spending thousands of dollars on something more impressive isn't going to make my 41-year old eyes see it any better.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    50. Re:Handbrake by Joe+Snipe · · Score: 1

      http://coreplayer.com/content/view/28/69/ for symbian, palm and wm6 devices.

      http://www.androidguys.com/2010/06/25/beta-test-rockplayerbase/ for Android (in Beta, but works great!)

      Nothing for iphone, sorry. try this instead: http://www.gadgetsdna.com/how-to-install-android-2-2-froyo-on-iphone-3g/3501/

      http://hubpages.com/hub/How-To-Play-MKV-Files-On-Playstation-3 Best bet for PS3 (which seems ridiculous, but tevs)

      --
      Sometimes, life itself is sarcasm...
    51. Re:Handbrake by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      Hint to those in "the scene": fuck DivX and fuck MKV, start using H.264+AAC in standard mp4 containers.

      .m4v files can't contain AC3 or DTS audio. Reencoding audio to AAC results in getting it downmixed to stereo on playback over a S/PDIF or HDMI connection unless you have one of the handful of cards that implement Dolby Digital Live and/or DTS Connect. That probably doesn't matter much if you're only going to play your movies on an iPhone, but it's not so good if you're feeding your home-theater setup from a MythTV box.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    52. Re:Handbrake by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      The above SHOULD work if it is an MKV with H.264 video and AAC video. It works for me.

      However, a lot of "scene" MKVs are H.264 video and AC-3 (Dolby Digital) audio. AC-3 audio can't be put into an MP4 container (which is one reason MKV is used). AC-3 or DTS is the required format for 90%+ of surround sound systems out there, which is why that format is used for the audio instead of AAC.

      To play such MKVs on a PS3, you need tsMuxer to remultiplex the H.264 video and the AC-3 audio into an MPEG transport stream (.m2ts)

      Also, MKV supports chapters and subtitles, I'm fairly certain the MP4 container doesn't. The MP4 container is VERY limited in capability.

      However, if targeting mobile devices (no need for surround sound), the MP4 container is the way to go, especially since many phones have some degree of AVC hardware acceleration these days.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    53. Re:Handbrake by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      With modern CPUs, 10 times faster isn't much of a difference, especially if your source content is high resolution (decoding takes the bulk of the time, since for transcoding you usually can't have hardware acceleration).

      Also, in general, my experience is that most MPEG-4 ASP encoders were developed and perfected back in the days of single-core CPUs, and people haven't done much work into multithreading them. H.264 encoders, on the other hand, have been the focus of a LOT of multithreading optimization. The end result is that in my experience, the difference in speed between H.264 and MPEG-4 ASP (DivX/XviD) is really only 2-3x once you take into account the improved multithreading of current H.264 codecs and the fixed amount of CPU needed for decoding the source format.

      Since you can kick off a bunch of queued jobs and then go to bed, such a difference in speed basically becomes irrelevant compared to the time you'll save in terms of dealing with target platform incompatibilities. If you're targeting ANY mobile phone, H.264+AAC in an MP4 container is the way to go.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    54. Re:Handbrake by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      You mean AAC?

      Because AC3 (Dolby Digital) can definately not be put into an MP4 container. This is probably the #1 reason the "scene" uses MKV. (Typical MKV "scene" releases are 720p MPEG-4 AVC aka H.264 with the original source AC3 audio, since unless the source is DTS, the original AC3 is basically the only way to provide surround sound to 90% of home theater setups out there.)

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    55. Re:Handbrake by TweakedDewAddict · · Score: 1

      AC-3 audio can't be put into an MP4 container
      AC3 was added to the MP4 spec last year

    56. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just started using RockPlayer on my EVO and it plays DivX (avi whatevers), though it is pretty barren of features. The HDMI out would be killer.

    57. Re:Handbrake by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      Rockplayer is a godsend, but unfortunately drains the battery in the blink of an eye :(

    58. Re:Handbrake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MP4 is ridiculously limited. It's not even comparable.

    59. Re:Handbrake by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen a single device or muxer that supports that combo.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    60. Re:Handbrake by TweakedDewAddict · · Score: 1

      Avidemux does it right now and they play on my PS3. You get a warning message in Avidemux that says "may not be supported", but the file is valid and seems to play correctly through my system. I don't have my PC hooked up to 5.1, so I couldn't tell you if VLC plays the sound correctly, but it does play the file.

    61. Re:Handbrake by juasko · · Score: 0

      don't like hard facts?

  2. Multiple versions by mikael_j · · Score: 5, Informative

    While it does mean you'll use up a little extra storage it is probably best to encode one version for each resolution, h.264 tends to be the standard in video these days (especially for mobile devices since they tend to have h.264 decoding hardware).

    By using one resolution per device (or at least for the more common devices and then a couple of fallback resolutions) you ensure the best possible quality for the largest number of users while also avoiding wasting a lot of bandwidth streaming high-res iPhone 4-res video to some other phone just because you didn't want your video to look like crap on the iPhone.

    --
    Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    1. Re:Multiple versions by dingen · · Score: 1

      What's the advantage of multiple resolutions instead of just pushing one 480p (or 360p if detail isn't that important) file at a low enough bitrate to be streamable but high enough to be watchable?

      Seems to me that everyone would be happy with this one version of the video.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    2. Re:Multiple versions by mikael_j · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, 480p isn't high enough to match the resolution of the iPhone 4 and it would have to be upscaled which looks significantly worse than native resolution (it does, really, there are plenty of users who dislike this even if you happen to be one of the loudmouths who claim it looks "just fine").

      Obviously higher res video needs higher bitrates to look good.

      And finally you don't have to waste bandwidth by streaming the same 960x640 high bitrate video to every user just to make sure that the iPhone 4 users don't get a video that looks like crap on their device. You also lower the risk of having lower end devices choke on videos with a bitrate that's too high for them to handle.

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    3. Re:Multiple versions by Kylock · · Score: 2, Informative

      Going lower than this is silly. The OP is asking about iOS and Andriod phones specifically. If were going to talk about the newest hardware, I'm not sure about the iPhone 4, but the HTC Evo and the Moto Droid X both support 720p video. HTC Just recently announced a new phone where they plan to support 1080, although it seems like overkill for such a small screen, I think they are thinking more people will use the hdmi outputs available on those phones.

      Maybe consider doing 720p and 360p versions if you decide to do 2 encodes instead of just one.

    4. Re:Multiple versions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe consider doing 720p and 360p versions if you decide to do 2 encodes instead of just one.
      Absolutely good advice. It's not a bad idea to follow YouTube's lead on this. H.264 at 360p, 480p, 720p (and on up) are what they've targetted. Going with 360p and 720p ensures you've got the low-end and high-end covered (for mobile web video at least).

    5. Re:Multiple versions by xded · · Score: 1

      And don't forget to use Lanczos anti-aliasing when downsizing to avoid moiré.

      FWIW, to do these kind of processing/conversions I once used an AVISynth script with Nero Recode. No match on flexibility and speed (repsectively) at that time.

    6. Re:Multiple versions by Simulant · · Score: 1

      there are plenty of users who dislike this even if you happen to be one of the loudmouths who claim it looks "just fine:

      Oh come on.... there are millions more who are, as I write this, watching stretched out, upscaled, crap ass video on their 720P/1080P flat screens, connected to their HD cable box via the RCA video jack. This includes every non-techie iphone user I know.

    7. Re:Multiple versions by LodCrappo · · Score: 1

      Can I just ask what "Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4" is supposed to mean? I'm quite familiar with both technologies and can't figure out what this is trying to say. Maybe I can't see the forest for the trees?

      --
      -Lod
    8. Re:Multiple versions by Narcogen · · Score: 1

      He's comparing the byproduct of IP sharing through NAT (incoming traffic cannot reach a destination past the router without extraordinary means (preconfigured port forwarding, DMZ) without a pre-established connection. Your local IP address behind the NAT router is inaccessible, except when the router sees you've established a connection with an external public IP, and then it creates a temporary port mapping table that connects the public IP and its port (say, 80 in the case of a webserver) with the public IP of your router at some high arbitrary port, which then maps to your local NAT IP address at port 80 so your web browser can read the page. Without your initial connection attempt (loading a web page) this port mapping is not created, and computers with public IP addresses cannot "see" or contact your machine.

      Greylisting does intentionally for email what NAT does as a byproduct. Unlike blacklisting, which enumerates email addresses to block, and whitelisting, which unemerates email addresses to allow, greylisting allows messages from only email addresses you've sent messages to-- like NAT only allows IP connections from IP addresses you've already contacted.

    9. Re:Multiple versions by LodCrappo · · Score: 1

      That would make a lot more sense if greylisting actually meant what you think it does. Greylisting has nothing to do with banning sources that you haven't sent messages to, or actually banning anything at all. Greylisting is simply giving a temp fail to a host you haven't seen before, and then allowing them as normal when (if) they retry. All this happens at the SMTP level and is completely automatic, so unlike NAT it does not require any specific configuration for individual entities.

      still not seeing the analogy

      --
      -Lod
    10. Re:Multiple versions by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 1

      NAT can be crossed if the users on both sides know the public IP address of the other. Host A sends a stream of garbage to the NAT gateway of Host B. All of these packets will be dropped, but it will make the router allow incoming traffic from that public address to go to Host A. Host B then sends its own garbage data to Host A's gateway, which will then pass through. Host B's router now will let traffic through. Once Host A gets the garbage, it can send an acknowledgement and establish a connection. I did that for a battleship game I wrote many moons ago so that I could play against friends through NAT. Not sure if this will work for all routers, but it worked with ours.

      --
      SSC
    11. Re:Multiple versions by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      They may claim that the iP4 does 720p, but it's screen is still only 960x640, and that number comes from http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html

    12. Re:Multiple versions by wvmarle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For that iPhone if bandwidth is a problem for 960x640 video, you may want to look at say 480x320 resolution video. Yes it has to scale up, but I can imagine it looks better than 480p or 360p as every video pixel becomes exactly 2x2 screen pixels. Instead of having to interpolate or whatever you have to do to make it fit on a non-matching resolution, like 1.5 screen pixels per video pixel.

      From my experience with LCD screens it is the non-matching of resolutions that make them look crappy. When using the exact half resolution they look good again, as the pixels fit nicely.

    13. Re:Multiple versions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      err, he did specifically say ANDROID phones. Android phones are not limited to high resolution EVO and Droid X phones. Older phones and phones more geared towards the mid and low end ranges will not have such a large screen.

      Also, H264 / AAC may run into licensing issues in the future, as it's royalty based. If the OP is offering the app for free / low cost and it becomes popular, you may have the MPEG-LA breathing down for their slice of the pie.

  3. MPEG-4, H.264 by dorzak · · Score: 2, Informative

    For iOS pretty much the only choice is MPEG-4, H.264.

    I believe Android supports it as well.

    Apple actually has a decent section in their web developer section on developer.apple.com about what is supported for iOS.

    1. Re:MPEG-4, H.264 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      plus android has hardware to decode h264 and save some battery...

  4. Supported media by LiENUS · · Score: 3, Informative

    The android developers site has an excellent list of supported media formats. http://developer.android.com/guide/appendix/media-formats.html The iphone 4 specifications http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html claims that the iPhone 4 supports AAC-LC and h.264 which android supports as well. So looks like you have an easy match for high quality as well.

  5. Android: WebM; iOS: H.264 by mlauzon · · Score: 0

    Well, for Android you could always use WebM, and for iOS H.264.

    1. Re:Android: WebM; iOS: H.264 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Or better just use H.264 for both.

    2. Re:Android: WebM; iOS: H.264 by dingen · · Score: 1

      If you're going to create an H264 version, you might as well push that to the Android devices as well.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    3. Re:Android: WebM; iOS: H.264 by pjotrb123 · · Score: 1
      --
      I liked my next sig a lot better
    4. Re:Android: WebM; iOS: H.264 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does android have good support for WebM? As far as I know, only h.264 has hardware acceleration on *any* phone, including android ones.

      A phone CPU is going to struggle to keep frame rate up and/or burn battery playing WebM.

    5. Re:Android: WebM; iOS: H.264 by Kitsune+Inari · · Score: 1

      But that way he wouldn't be promoting Free standards. So I guess it's up to him whether the tradeoff between Freedom and simplicity is worth it for him or not.

  6. mediacoder by ceraphis · · Score: 3, Informative

    As others mentioned, make it an h264 video with aac audio. I suggest using mediacoder, a free encoder with a billion options, including preconfigured iphone profiles I believe. Others suggest handbrake but I've found in the past that mediacoder looks like it has a lot more options to fiddle with. YMMV though, I've read handbrake has come a long way since ditching the "only encode DVDs" thing It used to do exclusively.

    1. Re:mediacoder by Warll · · Score: 3, Informative

      It should be mentioned that MediaCoder is in the ffmpeg hall of shame: http://www.ffmpeg.org/shame.html (I cannot link any more direct because ffmpeg's bug tracker uses a self signed cert)

      Judging from the related bug tracker the author appears to almost be playing dumb.
      I agree that it is a fine program and I myself have suggested it to non-tech savy friends, but that doesn't mean I feel good about doing so.

    2. Re:mediacoder by wampus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I just read that entire stupid ass bug. I can't possibly imagine why the author decided to tell the ffmpeg guys to fuck off.

    3. Re:mediacoder by Luckyo · · Score: 0

      It should be noted that many of the better (if not best) encoding programs can be found on the shame list for one reason or another. MediaCoder, FormatFactory, etc. There are some that are for the reason such as FormatFactory that seems to be there out of total ignorance (no one seems to even have bothered to email the program developer with grievances). There are some cases where the dev honestly comes to ask "how can I comply?" and the answer he gets is summarizable in "RTFM nub! Follow the licence!" with no hints on what exactly is supposed to be done about it (such as the issue with mediacoder).

    4. Re:mediacoder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, unbelievable. And it's still on Sourceforge! Since when do they host closed source?

      As for an encoder frontend on Windows, Staxrip. Staxrip Staxrip Staxrip. Nothing else.

    5. Re:mediacoder by gravis777 · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up, I was going to suggest this if noone else did. It has a full blown version (free), as well as one specifically tweaked for mobil devices (also free). Use h264, and I recommend one encode per device. I am not sure about the android, but the iPhone is REALLY picky over the resolution of its videos.

      Also, if you have some Adobe Suites laying around, Adobe Media Encoder is SWEET, especially if you have CS5. I know it has presets for iPhone, and CS5 will hopefully have presets for Android as well

    6. Re:mediacoder by dotancohen · · Score: 2, Informative

      Here's the bug:
      https://roundup.ffmpeg.org/issue1162

      The MediaCoder author is asking what he violated and the FFmpeg dev is just telling him to RTFL (license), all of it. The FFmpeg dev is being a jerk, too, and calling him names. The MediaCoder author even mentioned that he asked on the mailing list before distributing and got told that him usage was fine.

      MediaCoder might be violating the license, but it looks like an honest mistake that the author wants to rectify. The FFmpeg dev would rather call him names than show him what he did wrong.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    7. Re:mediacoder by Slashdot+Suxxors · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No kidding. The finer points of the GPL are lost on me as well, but god damn. The guy is actively trying to fix the problem with FFmpeg and I'm over halfway through the thread and they have been nothing but unhelpful assholes to him.

    8. Re:mediacoder by ceraphis · · Score: 1

      I have to echo this. It's a pity that the mediacoder dev couldn't get his ducks in a row, but he's opening an honest dialog on that thread and in return is being ridiculed and spat upon. It may not be an issue that diego would like to deal with, but that doesn't mean he should be a jerk (the jerk store called...!).

      I find it both humorous and disappointing that he justifies his ridicule by saying that he deals with "ignorance" all the time and so, of course, now has a short fuse. That may give reason, but it doesn't justify being an ass, either help the guy or shut the hell up. He's wasting even more of his time than helping the guy out by just ridiculing him.

    9. Re:mediacoder by Minwee · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Maybe we're half way through reading different threads. The one I read goes something like this:

      "Hey, MediaCoder violates our license. What can we do about it?"
      "No it doesn't!"
      "Yes it does. Read the license for ffmpeg."
      "I don't want to. Read it for me!"
      "Seriously, read the license for the software you are reselling."
      "I didn't do it! Someone else did it first!"
      "I don't care. Read the damn license."
      "Reading is hard. Please read the license for me."
      "Why don't you just read the license?"
      "How about I release a patch? I haven't done it yet, but let's just pretend that I will. Does that make everything better?"
      "No. Read the license."
      "Okay, here's a patch. Is everything okay now?"
      "That doesn't help. Just read the license for ffmpeg and stop violating it."
      "I don't want to. Maybe I could change the colour of the windows in the installer. Why isn't anyone helping me? Why won't you tell me what I can do?"
      "Have you tried reading the license?"

      While things certainly could have been handled better by both sides, when you are taking someone else's work and reselling it the way that Mediacoder is, it shouldn't be too much to ask that you spend a little bit of time making sure that you aren't violating the license you acquired it under. Being too busy selling copies of ffmpeg for $399 isn't an excuse for not being able to read.

    10. Re:mediacoder by daboochmeister · · Score: 1

      Confirmed, Handbrake has come a long way in the last 9 months, and now offers every option (I believe) available from x264, the encoding lib it uses. It also has picked up speed a fair amount (though I think that's more from improvements in x264 than Handbrake).

      I've found the nightly builds (in spite of the disclaimers to the contrary) to be very stable, and if you're on an *buntu (or can spin up an Ubuntu VM), you can install from the PPA quite easily.

      Here for instructions on installing from PPA; here's some info from the Ubuntu wiki on using Handbrake to encode for Android.

      A feature just now gaining support in the nightly builds, which I look forward to, is a "preview" mode, so you can check the effect of settings changes on the resulting video quality.

      --
      "Ahh! I see you're in that indeterminate Schrodinger state where - oh, uh ... never mind." Dave Bucci
    11. Re:mediacoder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but the thread I read was the one that GP read and you're characterization of the discussion is skewed. Firstly, you can tell the developer's native language isn't English. And yet the FFMpeg people repeatedly respond without the slightest attempt to understand the actual intent of the developer's post. They even go so far as to make a joke out of the obvious attempt to say that he doesn't charge money for his software (he wrote, "I charge people for nothing" which was turned into a joke about his software being valueless.)

      As I read the thread, he was actively trying to figure out what he needed to do to come into compliance with the license. When someone has that attitude, there should be no reason to involve lawyers. Just telling someone to read the GPL is asinine. It's confusing enough even when you speak the language. I know there are translations available online, but I can't imagine that makes it much easier. He indicated on numerous occasions that he had read the license and he didn't see where he was in non-compliance. They could have had done with the issue by posting a simple list of things that they believed he needed to do or even a simple list of things they believed he was doing that were contrary to the license. Far from providing free legal advice, this is what they would have to do if they were to pursue legal action against him.

      But instead, they adopted a bitter and unhelpful tone and showed they were uninterested in resolving the issue. They seem more interested in painting a negative picture of the developer and/or extracting a piece of the money he's making off his software. The bitterness is likely due to his decision to stop open sourcing his software. But that doesn't excuse their behavior. Regardless of whether the developer was in non-compliance with the license, the FFMpeg people lost a lot of my respect. The GPL isn't like a typical EULA...there is a spirit behind the legalese that's more important than the actual text. And part of that spirit is when someone is trying, in good faith, to comply with the license, you cooperate to help that compliance happen.

    12. Re:mediacoder by Minwee · · Score: 1

      If you can't understand a software license, and can't be bothered to find someone to help you understand it, then you have no business trying to sell that software.

      It is not the business of the people you are ripping off to provide you with free legal advice after the fact.

    13. Re:mediacoder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you could interpret the thread:
      -ok, so you claim I don't comply to GPL, can you please tell why you think I am out of bounds?
      -fuck no!
      -In my opinion I comply, why do you think otherwise?
      -RTFM!!!!newbz

  7. iOS only support H.264 by zbobet2012 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you wish to hit iOS H.264 is your only option. Apple has very strict requirements on applications that stream over 3g, including a 60k/s variant. (If you don't mean actual streaming but just progressive download thats different). You can look those up on the Apple developer forums.

  8. Audio: speech or more? by dingen · · Score: 4, Informative

    The sound quality is also important.

    You say you are making instructional videos, which implies to me the audio will contain mostly speech. If that is indeed the case, then a low bitrate like 64 kbps in mono will probably suffice. Encoders like MP3 or AAC are very good at keeping speech intelligible at lower bitrates.

    --
    Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    1. Re:Audio: speech or more? by cptdondo · · Score: 1

      Further, you can cut the video size in half by going to 15fps instead of 30fps.

      Unless you're doing high speed action flicks, no one will notice.

      I've encoded fast action at 15fps for use on a handheld and no one noticed.

      Also, I'm not sure about the devices you want to support, but typically you can encode at 1/4 the display resolution with OK results. Fast action at 1/4 resolution looks OK.

      So:

      1/4 resolution x 1/2 frame rate = 1/8 bandwidth of a normal stream.

    2. Re:Audio: speech or more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If it's ALL speech, or only speech and noise but no music, then you don't need a music codec at all.

      Ogg Speex will encode crystal clear human speech (particularly most male speakers of English) at just a few kbit/s

      But then you say you want it to work on iOS. So that throws everything out. Just ask Apple what they want you to do, and do that, there's no point in trying to think, Apple doesn't reward thinking. Obey.

  9. Re:h.264 takes too much juice to play by willy_me · · Score: 2, Informative

    It will use less power to play h264 in hardware then MPEG2 in software. And all of the phones will have hardware h264 decoders.

  10. Video for Everybody, and an Android caveat by cshbell · · Score: 1

    I'm assuming you're talking about web video; if not, this info won't be applicable. The 'Video for Everybody' project at Camen Design has put a lot of work into cross-platform HTML5 video, and the test page has an extensive compatibility matrix for both desktop and mobile platforms.

    Be aware that if you're targeting Android, its implementation of HTML5 video is lackluster (for now; I'd expect this to get better soon). Details of the problems, and a few solutions, can be found here: http://www.broken-links.com/2010/07/08/making-html5-video-work-on-android-phones/.

  11. Better place to ask by kabloom · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Isn't this a better question for StackOverflow.com?

    1. Re:Better place to ask by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or reddit or.. who knows perhaps /. is not so bad after all.

  12. QT-AVIdemux by gagol · · Score: 4, Informative

    I am under Ubuntu and uses QT-AVIdemux and uses MENU: Auto-> Apple-> Apple Ipod

    Works everytime.

    DO NOT USE THE GTK VERSION as the auto facilities are not included.

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
  13. Testing is the only way, but here are the tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Assuming the video is already in a non encrypted format (read- not on a DVD) I recommend mediacoder (http://www.mediacoderhq.com/index.htm). It's free, runs pretty much everything, and has a bounty of features.

    The mobile version is OK (assuming you know what device). If you get the full version you can control just about everything (video size, native resolution, bitrate, encoder, effects, etc...).

    I would recommend playing with the settings, seeing what works and what doesn't work, then saving the final set-up as preset.

    The one issue I've run into with mediacoder is subtitles. It burns subtitles into the video, even if you choose the "do not render" option. If you start with an .mkv remove the subtitles using mkv merge (http://www.bunkus.org/videotools/mkvtoolnix/doc/mkvmerge-gui.html), then process away. Both video and audio are straight forward, and should allow for whatever you're doing.

    The forum for mediacoder should answer any other questions you might have. Best of luck to you, and remember that commercial users of mediacoder should seriously consider donating to keep the project running.

  14. And MPEG2 in hardware less still by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And MPEG2 in hardware less still. And for mobile devices without H.264 hardware assist, you don't have H.264 hardware assist, so you're back to software decoding which is much cheaper with MPEG2 than with H.264.

    1. Re:And MPEG2 in hardware less still by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      You seem to be forgetting bandwidth in your argument, and that very few mobile devices CAN decode MPEG2 in hardware.
      So far it's been proprietary formats, then 3gp and now h.264 when it comes to cell phones.

      I agree that MPEG2 have it's uses as a less CPU intensive codec, but not in this case.
      Had we been talking about the best intermediary format for video editing, I'd have told you to always transcode your h.264 to high bandwidth (50Mbit) MPEG2, or something else like for instance Cineform, as h.264 is very poorly suited for editing, and not just because it's very highly compressed :)

      For the bandwidths available for mobile phones (1-2Mbit range tops for most users) you have to go with a codec with a very high compression rate, like the h.264, especially since the devices in question do come with hardware decoders.

  15. other concerns by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 3, Informative

    As others have suggested, handbrake + h.264

    But my thought is, 10-20 minute instructional videos? Especially on a mobile device?
    Break it up into 2-4 minute segments. No one is going to watch a 20 minute video, and retain what was in minute 0-6. zzzzzzzzzz

    1. Re:other concerns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Not to mention he can get more advertising revenue this way.

  16. Ignore the fanboy rhetoric by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Upload to youtube and forget about it.

    1. Re:Ignore the fanboy rhetoric by gollito · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would say do this too. Can't speak for iOS but on Android a youtube link fires up the youtube app and on my EVO it goes full screen. I think it is similar on the iphone too.

    2. Re:Ignore the fanboy rhetoric by martinX · · Score: 1

      Normally good advice (even the big companies don't mind the YouTube watermark, it seems), but I think he wants to sell them as part of an app so YouTube is probably out.

      --
      When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
    3. Re:Ignore the fanboy rhetoric by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An "App" that just shoes a bunch of videos is almost as bad as all those "apps" that just have a bunch of images of "sexy" girls. They're much better handled on the web. Don't need to make different versions for iphone/android, either.

  17. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    vlc.exe -vvv -I dummy myvideo.avi --sout="#transcode{ab=96,samplerate=44100,channels=2,acodec=mp4a,vcodec=h264,width=480,height=320,vfilter="canvas{width=480,height=320,aspect=16:9}",fps=25,vb=900,venc=x264{profile=baseline,level=3.0,no-cabac,keyint=75,ref=3,bframes=0}}

    --sout="#transcode{threads=2,high-priority,audio-sync,acodec=mp4a,ab=64,samplerate=22050,channels=2,vcodec=mp4v,fps=23.976,vb=900,width=480,height=320,vfilter="canvas{width=480,height=320,aspect=16:9}",venc=ffmpeg{qmax=20}}

  18. Quicktime has made this easy... by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

    File>Export>Movie to Iphone

    --
    "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  19. How about now vs. later? Terrible advice. by SuperKendall · · Score: 1, Troll

    Well, for Android you could always use WebM, and for iOS H.264.

    Oh really? Oh what currently shipping device would that work?

    If you can name a shipping device on which that would work, then mull over the battery implications of playing back hardware decoded video vs. using the mobile CPU to do all the decoding.

    WebM is a great idea and it will be interesting to see if Google can push hardware makers to support it, but to suggest using it for anything that plans to ship in under a year is awful advice.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  20. For iPhone streaming, M3U8 file by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure if Android supports this yet, but the best way to do what you want is to encode at a few different bitrates, and build an M3U8 wrapper which basically describes what video to use at the current bandwidth available to the device. You point the player at that file, then the player makes the choice at runtime which of the feeds to use.

    I'm not sure if you need anything specific on the server side beyond encoding all the video in h.264.

    Even if you can't do this for Android it's still well worth supporting on the iPhone, since someone on WiFi can have a much better quality video viewing experience than someone on 3G.

    You also might consider bundling lower quality versions with the app for times when there is no network to be had - though with so many videos, it might only be practical to cache from the server or not cache at all.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:For iPhone streaming, M3U8 file by dmorel · · Score: 1

      No segmented mpeg via m3u8 on anything but APPL devices, it's their standard, like microsofts smooth streaming (though I do some STB guys who have written a linux app to handle smooth streaming chunks)... but there's nothing for android yet that I am aware. It's true for streaming to mobile devices, and well really any IP connected devices, some form of adaptive bit rate streaming over HTTP is the way to go. It's funny, the company that pioneered this stuff Move Networks is basically out of business but Microsoft, Apple, and Adobe (plus the big CDN's like Akamai and Limelight) are all moving towards HTTP streaming. For the OP, it's H.264 as everyone and their mother has said so far, works on both handsets you're talking about and is easy. FFMpeg is probably doing the work regardless of what front end wrapper you're putting on it.

  21. Why do it alone? by cdrgonzo · · Score: 0

    H.264 with aac for both. Http live streaming on ios, progressive downloads on everything else... Seriously, why waste your time doing this solo? plenty of companies already do this stuff almost for free a lot better than you can do it by yourself. Ooyala or brightcove are good for web. Synctv does web and custom apps across every major platform (ios , android, pre, yahoo widgets, bluray, roku, etc...) You can waste months developing something not even close to as good.

  22. It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by pslam · · Score: 1

    That requirement pretty much restricts the choice to H.264. I think Android and iOS both have 3GPP support (not sure), and maybe H.263, but they're both rather terrible quality.

    The shame is that, and don't rip me a new one for saying this, Theora is otherwise a perfect solution. Most smartphones in the last few years will manage QVGA (320x240) software-only decode perfectly fine. That means it's a baseline that will work on nearly all Android handsets and any iOS platform from 3G onwards. QVGA is a perfectly acceptable resolution, bearing in mind you want this to fit reliably on a 3G link. I'm sure many will be telling you to cram a 800x480 1mbps video down to handsets, but that's extreme overkill.

    As for audio, oddly enough a baseline may be MP3. You only need 48kbit for a high quality mono stream. Any more is overkill. You can go for AAC if you really must. Again, the shame here is that Vorbis would otherwise be a perfect solution.

    Summary: H.264/AAC/MP3. In an ideal world Theora/Vorbis, but sadly there's too much political shenanigans and misinformation to make that a reality. (And because of that, it's not available out-of-the-box on these handsets)

    1. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by TD-Linux · · Score: 1

      I think he wants to make it through the entire 20 minute instructional video on battery... Enjoy your horribly wasteful software decoding, or use h.264 which has very liberal and cheap licensing requirements (in fact, you won't have to pay anything as the hardware decoder is already paid for by the hardware manufacturer, and you don't owe anything for encoding the video, look it up) From a business standpoint, which makes more sense? P.S. not to give you a new one, but you fail to list any reasons why Theora was superior. In fact, it's been said many many times again that it's quite a bit worse. QVGA is horrible on modern smartphones which have very high resolution displays, and young users who can see the detail on a high resolution screen. 48kbit mp3 sounds like a metallic mess even for voice to me, especially considering that this is a portable market and many users will use headphones. Have you actually attempted mono mp3 at 48kbit/s? I think you have your perfect world wrong here - the only thing that restricts h.264 is the patents (and relatively cheap, they are). Vorbis is admittedly a bit superior, but mp3 encoders have gotten so much better it matters far less than the video.

    2. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by pslam · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is what I mean by misinformation:

      I think he wants to make it through the entire 20 minute instructional video on battery... Enjoy your horribly wasteful software decoding, or use h.264 which has very liberal and cheap licensing requirements (in fact, you won't have to pay anything as the hardware decoder is already paid for by the hardware manufacturer, and you don't owe anything for encoding the video, look it up)

      Do you realize how little CPU it takes to do QVGA decode software-only? Depends on the handset, but 10-30% is realistic. Do you know how much battery impact that has? Ball-park 100mW. Very little compared to the backlight or OLED (0.5W) and an order of magnitude less than the power a continuous 3G link is taking (1-2W).

      H.264 has additional license fees for professional use. Yes, most people ignore that.

      You continue to use the fallacy that Theora is worse as a reason not to use it. QVGA is not horrible on a modern smartphone - it is perfectly acceptable on a screen that's barely 4 inches across. The different between Theora and H.264 everyone overstates is for high bitrate, high profile, high resolution videos. This is none of the above, and even if it was, under fair analysis (not H.264 high profile which even a 3GS doesn't do) it's about 20% for "HD" video. Ths isn't HD.

      48kbit MP3 is perfectly reasonable when it's mono. Next you'll tell my 128kbit MP3 stereo isn't acceptable. Come on, this is coming out of a handset speaker. You obviously haven't tried 48kbit or you wouldn't make such a ridiculous statement. Me, I've been in the codec business (and writing them) for over a decade.

      I'm not even suggesting anyone use Theora/Vorbis as a solution. My gripe is that it could so easily be a neat solution. But isn't because, well, there's a ton of misinformation like yours around.

      The truth - and if you'd ever tried it you wouldn't even question this - is that QVGA resolution is fine, 48kbit mono audio is fine, Theora is more than fine, and battery impact is negligibly different between codecs at these settings. I would love to know WHY people even think otherwise, because I'm trying hard to combat the spread of overkill like this. Who is "educating" folks with this?

    3. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by MadGeek007 · · Score: 1
      Thank you for your detailed response. Insight like this is exactly why I posted to ask /. If I had any mod points left, I'd mod the parent up.

      H.264 has additional license fees for professional use. Yes, most people ignore that.

      Upon further investigation, I discovered http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/226/n-10-02-02.pdf Which states, in part:

      "MPEG LA announced today that its AVC Patent Portfolio License will continue not to charge royalties for Internet Video that is free to end users (known as Internet Broadcast AVC Video) during the next License term from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2015. Products and services other than Internet Broadcast AVC Video continue to be royalty-bearing, and royalties to apply during the next term will be announced before the end of 2010."

      Therefore, the statement in the grandparent comment is incorrect.

      in fact, you won't have to pay anything as the hardware decoder is already paid for by the hardware manufacturer, and you don't owe anything for encoding the video, look it up

      I will make my videos free to end users, so at this time I will not need to pay any fees. However, if I had planned on charging for access to the videos, I may have gotten into some trouble if I had not read your comment. Thank you.

    4. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      Some numbers.

      Nokia n900.

      Medium brightness.

      480x272 h264.

      mplayer - 60% CPU at 500MHz. 460mA. This is software.

      Built in player. 30% CPU at 500MHz. 270mA. This is hardware.

      Or - around a half more to do it in software.

      However. This is pretty much the worst case.

      If you up the brightness to max - then it's more like an extra third (120mA is added on in both cases).

      With brightness at max, and streaming the video over 3G - it's under an extra quarter.

      Technically, with integrated hardware decoders - playing video can be remarkably inexpensive.
      Playing video with no sound at minimum brightness uses around 50mA more - around an additional 5% of the battery an hour over just having the system idle.

      But - especially for the original questioner - this isn't very interesting information, as 3G or screen brightness will often swamp this.

      With the

    5. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by westlake · · Score: 1

      I will make my videos free to end users, so at this time I will not need to pay any fees. However, if I had planned on charging for access to the videos, I may have gotten into some trouble if I had not read your comment. Thank you.

      Short subjects - 12 minutes or less - are royalty free.

      You should seriously consider breaking up your instructional videos into smaller - more easily digestible - pieces.

      The royalty on retail sales by title is 2% of sales or 2 cents a disk or download - whichever is lower.
      MPEG LA licensing is oriented toward very large scale commercial distribution - the premium cable channel with more 100,000 subscribers, the local broadcaster serving more than 500,000 households.

      You really have little or nothing to offer them until you are seeeing sales of a quarter of million units with some regularity.

    6. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by pslam · · Score: 2, Informative

      This generalization is wrong. Verses H.264, Theora does not perform well at any bitrate or resolution. Those who claim otherwise simply don't like H.264 because it's proprietary or have been given wrong information, like yourself.

      Define "well". That's suitably vague. I put a figure on it: 20%. What's 20%? That's error power difference.

      That's still perfectly usable. In some cases you can just use a little more bit rate to make up the difference, and depending on what that costs to you (bandwidth/storage/battery) that's not a problem. In some cases you don't even need that extra 20% and you can live with - or not notice - the difference.

      Again, bear in mind the subject matter: these are instructional videos, NOT some glorious multimedia entertainment experience.

      I'm dismayed that the consensus seems to be he needs H.264 720p 256kbit 5.1 AAC multi-megabit videos. What a waste. 240p mono would do just fine, and has a better chance of working over 3G even in marginal areas. Has everyone lost touch with reality, and not to mention pragmatism?

    7. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by pslam · · Score: 1

      Thanks! I think I would go with H.264/AAC as pretty much every modern Android and iOS handset is going to play that. The H.264/MP3 combination may even cause trouble.

      What I don't recommend is the absurd overkill some are suggesting. I would hate to see you waste all that hosting bandwidth and storage, and end up with a high bitrate stream that will be problematic over 3G, and might not even work on a wide variety of handsets.

      I would try to:

      • Pick the lowest "profile" H.264 you can. There's a simple "low complexity" profile that isn't as efficient, but works on more handsets. You'll find "high" profile won't work on many (including 3GS, I think). As a bonus, it'll use a small amount less battery (but this isn't a show-stopper).
      • Pick the lowest resolution you can. You'd be surprised how good a decent codec looks even in QVGA (320x240). If that's too low for your content, step up through 360p, 480p. Frankly, 360p should be enough - 480p and up on a 4" screen is "eye diagram" territory. Yes, I know "retina" display and all that, but the point of ultra-high-res screens is to make things look crisper, not necessarily to cram more information onto a page.
      • Ditch stereo. That's almost half the audio bitrate gone in one shot. 48bit AAC is plenty - those suggesting this is too low frankly haven't tried it. It's almost overkill for speech-only as it is.
      • A lot of people are suggesting splitting into lots of small videos. This is a good idea. If you have short enough videos, you could go as far as buffering entire videos before playback. Depends how much latency (from selecting a video to it playing) you can put up with.

      Just experiment a bit - but try to start from "lowest" settings first. Oh, and look up which formats YouTube uses. They're sure to be using widely supported settings.

    8. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by StormUP · · Score: 1

      This is what I mean by misinformation:

      48kbit MP3 is perfectly reasonable when it's mono. Next you'll tell my 128kbit MP3 stereo isn't acceptable. Come on, this is coming out of a handset speaker. You obviously haven't tried 48kbit or you wouldn't make such a ridiculous statement. Me, I've been in the codec business (and writing them) for over a decade.

      128 kbit MP3 stereo really isn't acceptable. I stopped using it way back in 2000/2001 or so as devices with a reasonable amount of space allowed me to. 192k MP3 is the lower end of acceptable. Not only did I stop encoding anythinng new in 128k bit it I deleted everything existing that I had already encoded at 192 kbit or below in late 2001. At 128k it's of a low enough quality that it at times physically gives me headaches after longish listening sessions for some types of recording which I don't seem to experience with higher bit rates. In the modern age I really wish lossy audio compression would just go away altogether, but it still has it's uses on the internet for streaming where bandwidth may be limited. Low bit rate is the primary reason I don't use sites like pandora.com

    9. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you realize how little CPU it takes to do QVGA decode software-only? Depends on the handset, but 10-30% is realistic. Do you know how much battery impact that has? Ball-park 100mW. Very little compared to the backlight or OLED (0.5W) and an order of magnitude less than the power a continuous 3G link is taking (1-2W).

      It's also probably less than the cost of emulating a framebuffer via glTexImage...

    10. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by pslam · · Score: 1

      Low bit rate is the primary reason I don't use sites like pandora.com

      Requirement: audio to accompany an instructional video, likely speech. Not crystal clear high quality entertainment music.

      Requirement: played on a cell phone handset. Likely through a mono speaker. Not a pair of high end big speakers.

    11. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is 20% compared to baseline profile at relatively high bitrates. The iphone 3gs, iphone 4, ipad and newer ipod touch model support high profile fine and then the difference is closer to 100%.

    12. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by pslam · · Score: 1

      The difference is 20% compared to baseline profile at relatively high bitrates. The iphone 3gs, iphone 4, ipad and newer ipod touch model support high profile fine and then the difference is closer to 100%.

      This is a misuse of the statistics. The trouble is they don't converge as the bitrate goes up - Theora converges to a lowest SSIM asymptote than H.264, so asking the bitrate it needs to have an equivalent SSIM is distorting things. It's good that those stats don't ask for the equivalent bitrate to reach 0.9999, because then there would be a lot of infinities being thrown around. (There's always some truncation error in the algorithm)

      If you look at the previous graph of bitrate vs SSIM - which has a shifted Y axis to amplify the small differences - you'll notice most of the values in the usable bitrates are above 0.9. This is an amount which is viewable without artifacts causing things to look too bad. Don't take my word for it, have a look at this paper on SSIM.

      The point is they're all into the region where they're acceptable quality. H.264 just gets closer to perfection, which is important if you want "high definition" video.

      But this isn't an HD production we're talking about.

    13. Re:It's a shame, the out-of-the-box requirement. by JonJ · · Score: 1

      Sir, I must congratulate you for not understanding the issue at hand at all. And people wonder why audiophiles are being made fun of.

      --
      -- Linux user #369862
  23. Even 360p is overkill by pslam · · Score: 1

    What's wrong with 320x240 (QVGA)? This is supposed to go over a 3G link, and quite frankly if it's just some instructional videos, you don't need crisp, crystal clear video. Going for low resolution also means you can turn down the 'profile' settings for the encoder, ensuring it works on a wider variety of handsets.

    I think you'll be surprised just how good low resolution video works. Most of the quality difference is from codec choice, not resolution. I think most people are imagining crappy 3GPP and/or H.263 videos (old flash). iPhone 4 may have a high resolution display, but it's still only a few inches. Even the larger form factor handsets aren't big enough to warrant high resolution videos, quite frankly. We're not talking entertainment here - this is instructional.

    1. Re:Even 360p is overkill by DMalic · · Score: 1

      I second this. Youtube 320 looks surprisingly good now on videos with a decent source. I have to wonder if they're using better settings than in the past.

  24. tapiocamobile.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You should check out http://www.tapiocamobile.com. Their service is what you need.
    It is one of qualcomm's products.

  25. H264 Warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because h264 fits your technical needs you still have to be aware of the licensing.

    Not all uses of h264 are free !

  26. Re:How about now vs. later? Terrible advice. by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is no need to push hardware developers, they already make DSP chips for mobile devices that will be able to do HW acceleration for WebM. We're just waiting for software to make this happen.

  27. Ogg Frog will eventually do that and more by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

    Ogg Frog is designed to rip CDs into OGG format and then support MP3 and other formats. It will be based on Zoolib which Mike Crawford is working on porting to different platforms with Andy Green.

    Eventually Mike will take Ogg Frog out of alpha testing and move it to beta and then a golden 1.0 release in 2020, 2023 tops. By then standards will have changed to something else but the OGG audio and video formats will be used as they are open sourced and almost everything else is someone else's or company's IP and will start suing people who use them in their applications and sell music and videos in that format. Compuserve for example came up with GIF standards as I recall and started suing so people moved to TIF, JPG, PNG, etc. PNG I believe is safe from lawsuits but it is only an image format and not an audio or video format.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  28. Make an instructional video when you're done! :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm just sayin......

    Just remember the wise words of Vader, "You are part of a rebel alliance and a traitor. Take her away!"

  29. No one is going to do [x] on a mobile device? by rbeattie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I only had a buck every time I read, "No one is going to do [x] on a mobile device," over the past few years...

    I have entire seasons of TV shows (Last Airbender) queued up on my phone for when I get trapped waiting somewhere and/or my son is bored on car trips, etc. It's not 2004 any more - the whole "mobisodes" trend came and went as it was discovered people don't *like* 2 minute custom-created content for the phones. They want normal length videos, and with today's large screens and relatively massive storage there's no problem with that.

    -Russ

    --
    Me
    1. Re:No one is going to do [x] on a mobile device? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      TV shows or movies != instructional video. Completely different use case.

      Sure I could watch a 30 min TV show on the train going to work (if I had an iTouch/iPhone/Android and if I rode the train).
      But if it were an instructional vid of how to change the oil in the car, I'd like to be able to bypass the 'gather tools' and 'jack up the car' segments, and jump directly to 'turn the filter this way'.

    2. Re:No one is going to do [x] on a mobile device? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not really exclusive to mobile. I'd expect that much for web content in general

    3. Re:No one is going to do [x] on a mobile device? by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      I remember one particular set of instructional videos (how to download Ibycus Topo) consisted of 3 10-minute videos.

      If you were moderately computer-savvy and had familiarity with BitTorrent, you only needed 30 seconds that started 8:30 in the first video (where to find the .torrent file, which the person who released Ibycus Topo didn't bother to link directly to.)

      What was funny was the only source for the .torrent file was ThePirateBay, despite the fact that this particular dataset was 100% free/legit as it was derived from government data sources that had VERY permissive licenses. (It was distributed by BT to save the author's bandwidth, and I guess TPB was the first torrent hosting site/tracker he thought of.)

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    4. Re:No one is going to do [x] on a mobile device? by alabandit · · Score: 1

      correctly designing the content for the target audience is essential. Any editor/director will spend hours on this. If you download "oil changing for dumies" use the fast farward or skip button or download the content at the level you need. i for one hate badly haked up instructional vids because some people are to lazy to skip a head

      --
      "You are still innocent until proven guilty. What's changed is what they do to innocent people." by notnAP (846325)
  30. Windows Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're targeting windows mobile, you're screwed. WMA is your only choice. Theora...nope forget it. Been there, done that.

  31. Go with what the porn sites use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which would be mpeg4 for high res vids and 3gp for low res.

  32. Or any Android forum -- already answered by beakerMeep · · Score: 1

    Indeed -- or any of the dozens (hundreds?) of Android community websites where this question has been answered 100 times already. I'm sorry, but Ask Slashdot has gone down the tubes (or series thereof). This is a question one could Google and find the answer to in less than a minute. This is supposed to be "news for nerds", not "common questions for laymen & kdawson."

    --
    meep
  33. mencoder to H.264 by nemesisrocks · · Score: 1

    That and output as H.264 which is really the only choice.

    Agree. H.264 is supported, in hardware, by most of the smartphones you care about (iPhone, Nokia/Symbian and most android phones).

    I've found the output from mencoder (part of mplayer) has worked across all three platforms flawlessly.

  34. Helix Mobile producer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Helix Mobile producer is purpose built for this task.

  35. Handbrake settings (CLI) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    /usr/bin/HandBrakeCLI -I -O -i %DIR%/%FILE% -t 1 -c 1-21 -o /mythtv/videos/Compressed/"%TITLE%"-"%SUBTITLE%".mp4 -f mp4 -w 480 -l 272 –crop 0:0:0:0 -e x264 -b 384 -2 -T -r 29 -a 1 -E faac -B 160 -R 44.1 -6 stereo -D 1 -x ref=2:me=umh:cabac=0:bframes=0 -C 8 -v

    I use this for encoding my MythTV recordings for my iPhone 3GS and my wife's Droid. Works very well.
    Enjoy. You're welcome. I assume you will figure out on your own how to best use this and get what you want out of it.

  36. MEncoder + bash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'll have to read the manual, but you'll be able to write a script to encode several different versions for different devices with relative ease.

  37. native youtube support ftw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    upload it to youtube, which is pretty format tolerant. iOS and Android both have youtube applications out of the box.

  38. h264 codeshop to the rescue by r34lg33k · · Score: 1

    check http://h264.code-shop.com/trac for encodings to fix vids for Android specificly, use the provided qtfaststart >qt-faststart "$tmpfile" "$outfile"

  39. On most devices, H.264 is not HW decoded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On most devices, H.264 is not HW decoded.

    For many current high-end, it is, but not most devices.

  40. And very few devices CAN decode H264 in HW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And very few devices CAN decode H264 in HW And bandwidth is more easily constrained by encoding smaller than using a more expensive computatinally algorithm.

    "I agree that MPEG2 have it's uses as a less CPU intensive codec, but not in this case."

    Yes, in this case too. The FA mentioned high end ones "too", not "only".

    "For the bandwidths available for mobile phones (1-2Mbit range tops for most users)"

    And 800Mbit at 512x384 is fine. You're using up space for the MP3 audio, too.

  41. Just Ask by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't know something and cannot be bothered to find out, just ask a question and let someone else do the work.

  42. Easy transcoding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I recommend Arista .

  43. ISO MPEG-4 H.264 Baseline Profile by gig · · Score: 2, Informative

    Encode your video in H.264 Baseline Profile and it will play on everything. Baseline Profile is DVD-quality, 640x480. Players with smaller screens will scale it down. The bigger HD H.264 profiles will not play on everything, because not all devices can play HD yet. Devices with smaller screens will scale the video down.

    You don't get to express your individuality with a choice of codec, because video consumers only have one: H.264. If your video is not H.264, the consumer cannot see it. That is the reason H.264 exists, that is why it has that ISO/IEC name starting with an H instead of its previous name, which was Advanced Video Coding. Making a universal meeting place for video content is why we have ISO standardization of video codecs, so there is a common playback and capture codec for consumers. In the same way that you had to use MPEG-2 video on a DVD Player, you have to use MPEG-4 H.264 video on the video players has succeeded it: iPhone, iPad, Blackberry, Android, Palm, Blu-Ray, iTunes, iPod, Zune, YouTube (although they will transcode nonstandard codecs to H.264 automatically), QuickTime Player, FlashPlayer, Safari, Chrome, IE9, Mac OS, Ubuntu, various set-tops and other devices.

    To stream well on 3G it will have to be very low-bandwidth. Typically, a version is encoded for Wi-Fi and a separate version for 3G.

    Apple has a lot of information about video authoring and encoding for mobile devices on their developer site. Apple has forgotten more about this topic than most companies will ever know: QuickTime is the backbone of audio video authoring, MPEG-4 is a standardization of the QuickTime file format, Final Cut Pro is the most popular pro video editor, iMovie is the most popular consumer video editor, WebKit the most video-savvy browser core, and of course they run iTunes Store are the maker of the iPod. So you can follow their advice and get the job done right. Their advice will also apply to Android and other smartphones because when it comes to video they are all iPods.

    http://developer.apple.com/

  44. arista, winff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find arista very good, and easy to use (for linux). Winff works great for me too, with more options. Transmageddon seems good too, as a sort of bleeding edge arista with more options. Winff runs on Windows too.

    http://www.transcoder.org/

    http://winff.org/

    http://www.linuxrising.org/transmageddon/

  45. Knots2 on the Maemo uses VLC on-the-fly by Linnerd · · Score: 1

    There is some software written for maemo called Knots2 (cf. http://wiki.maemo.org/Knots2) that does a pretty decent job of encoding a stream starting from any type of format to something that can be watched natively on the device or with a browser.

    It's what I use to access MythTV from my N900.

    No idea on how hard this would be to port to Android, though.

  46. DoubleTwist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just make a damn video (you pick the flavor) and link people to DoubleTwist.

  47. Re:Or any Android forum -- already answered by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

    I agree - it does seem to be odd to have a rather specific development question for one particular platform as an Ask Slashdot. I have plenty of questions I ask, for things like Symbian/Qt and Windows/DirectX development that I do in my spare time, and I'm sure plenty of other Slashdot readers do on various areas, but I post to an appropriate development forum (e.g., Nokia forums, GameDev). If every development question about a random platform they were development got asked, the front page would quickly get bogged down with endless questions...

  48. WURFL by __aadjqg2370 · · Score: 1

    I'm no expert on this, but http://wurfl.sourceforge.net/ has a very extensive database on mobile device capabilities, so you might find what you need there.

  49. Less talk, more examples .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ffmpeg -i myfile.mpg -target vcd /tmp/vcd.mpg

    Check out the "target" options for the best solution to your needs.
    If you don't find one that fits, check out mencoder.
    #!/bin/sh
    # This is for really simple XVID conversion, use
    SCALE=",scale=400:-3"
    VIDEO_BITRATE=500
    XVIDENCOPTS="turbo:bitrate=$VIDEO_BITRATE:max_key_interval=250:trellis:max_bframes=1:vhq=3"
    FRAMES="-ofps 15000/1001"
    for filename in "$@"; do

          IN=$filename

          NICE_LEVEL="+15"

          nice /usr/bin/mencoder "$IN" $FRAMES -oac mp3lame -lameopts preset=128 -ovc xvid \
                                    -vf lavcdeint${SCALE} -noodml -forceidx -ffourcc XVID \
                                    -xvidencopts ${XVIDENCOPTS} -of avi -o "${IN}-n800.avi"
    done

    Simple.

  50. ffmpeg Script by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I simply use ffmpeg to encode videos for iPhone playback. You can certainly adjust anything as desired:

    From a Windows batch file (note the file arguments), which can have a file dropped onto it:
    ffmpeg -y -threads 2 -i "%CD%\%~nx1" -vcodec libx264 -r 29.97 -s 480x272 -flags +loop -cmp +chroma -deblockalpha 0 -deblockbeta 0 -crf 24 -bt 256k -refs 1 -coder 0 -me umh -me_range 16 -subq 5 -partitions +parti4x4+parti8x8+partp8x8 -g 250 -keyint_min 25 -level 30 -qmin 10 -qmax 51 -trellis 2 -sc_threshold 40 -i_qfactor 0.71 -acodec libfaac -ab 192k -ar 48000 -ac 2 "%CD%\%~n1_iPhone.mp4"

  51. Re:Suck it N00bs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope I die a horrible lingerie death too... :P