Interesting discussion on h.264 and flash

[Elli]

I stumbled across this tonight:

http://annevankesteren.nl/2009/07/web-video-codecs

Apparently a "video" tag is potentially going to be included in HTML5.

But this was quite interesting:

"I think the HTML5 specification should make the requirement for Ogg Theora and Vorbis. Everything we do has the risk of patents after all and Mozilla and Opera not being able to commit to H.264 is a red herring. H.264 is not suitable regardless as it is not a royalty free format. And once Ogg Theora and Vorbis support is in browsers and content is encoded using these formats, hardware support for it will most definitely come. "

What do you guys and gals feel about open source codecs? Waste of time? Or a huge money and time saver? Thoughts?

[MediaGuy]

Originally Posted by Elli

I stumbled across this tonight:

http://annevankesteren.nl/2009/07/web-video-codecs

Apparently a "video" tag is potentially going to be included in HTML5.

But this was quite interesting:

"I think the HTML5 specification should make the requirement for Ogg Theora and Vorbis. Everything we do has the risk of patents after all and Mozilla and Opera not being able to commit to H.264 is a red herring. H.264 is not suitable regardless as it is not a royalty free format. And once Ogg Theora and Vorbis support is in browsers and content is encoded using these formats, hardware support for it will most definitely come. "

What do you guys and gals feel about open source codecs? Waste of time? Or a huge money and time saver? Thoughts?

I'm not really versed in the matter, but I heard the ultra expensive H.264 codec is alittle overblown and presents quite a few of the same issues we're dropping MS Encoder 9 - local hardware issues, browser compatibility issues, etc. etc.... The most amazing if you're in optimal conditions on all fronts (server, performer, user) but we on the terrain all know how the exceptions can just ramp up on you...

[Peedy]

Open source royalty free is nice but getting the big boys like apple microsoft etc to add support for them is slim. h.264 is a developed open standard however there are license fees. Another downside for open source codecs is that your editing and production tools pale in comparision to the commercial codecs. h.264 is supported in every modern software, whereas open source codecs have one off tools which is hard to develop a professional workflow. Good for the geek who wants to do some video but for professional peeps it won't cut it.


As far as quality I haven't seen anything better than h.264 these days.

[Elli]

Originally Posted by Peedy

Open source royalty free is nice but getting the big boys like apple microsoft etc to add support for them is slim. h.264 is a developed open standard however there are license fees. Another downside for open source codecs is that your editing and production tools pale in comparision to the commercial codecs. h.264 is supported in every modern software, whereas open source codecs have one off tools which is hard to develop a professional workflow. Good for the geek who wants to do some video but for professional peeps it won't cut it.


As far as quality I haven't seen anything better than h.264 these days.

Have to agree with you on all points there. I was reading all these threads on encoding in x264 last night, but it seems like a ton of technical fuss for the same result.

[Peedy]

Originally Posted by Elli

Have to agree with you on all points there. I was reading all these threads on encoding in x264 last night, but it seems like a ton of technical fuss for the same result.

Yup its the biggest problem with DivX, Ogg, Theora, and many other open codecs. Until the professional level tools are there to produce them I don't see them gaining much traction.

For example I love using FLAC (free lossless audio codec) for my master music rips from CDs. Its open so no vendor lock in, great quality, and free. However my iPod won't play them, a Zune won't play them and there are only a couple of players available for the desktop. Yet if I went with Apple Lossless or the windows media equivalent, I would have much more support in players and devices. Yet i'm at the mercy of what these vendors do and if one day they choose not to support these formats anymore then I am either stuck converting them to something else (a lot of work) or could even be shit out of luck.

There are pros and cons to both sides, but just like I have developed workflows for photos using photoshop's PSD format which isn't entirely open I live by that sword because at the end of the day the tools are there for production.