Why can WebMs not be encoded in VP9 for use on Sup Forums?

Why can WebMs not be encoded in VP9 for use on Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

cloudconvert.com/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

VP8 is more widely supported.

Sup Forums is well behind the times in this regard. I believe (4+2+2)chan has been supporting it for a while with no difficulty.

Only Safari doesn't support VP9 and they don't support WebM at all. YouTube has been running VP9 without any problems for years.

Encoding VP9 on hardware weaker than say a desktop core i7 is a total bitch.

If Sup Forums used VP9 exclusively, half the content on /wsg/ and /gif/ simply would never be created.

Now with VP10 or that merged project Google and a few others were working on there might be a difference. Hopefully the encoding times would not be as abysmal as they are now.

You mean AV1? That uses Daala, Thor and VP10 + improvements.

I doubt that you will see support widespread until they make hardware with it.

There's better chance of waiting for VP9 capable hardware to arrive than seeing if AV1 will be better. IMO, judging by the heuristics that have been released, AV1 is behind schedule. They really need at least like 1 more year of development but alas, they don't have that time.

>Encoding VP9 on hardware weaker than say a desktop core i7 is a total bitch.

You don't have to encode locally. These guys are very reliable and encoding is very fast.

cloudconvert.com/

they also support mp4, which means a lot less transcoding

do you mean decoding? encoding isn't something that needs to be particularly fast

>they also support mp4, which means a lot less transcoding

and audio sitewide, and filesize limits above 4MB, as well as multiple images/videos per post

>You don't have to encode locally. These guys are very reliable and encoding is very fast.
Errm, letting a random cloud know exactly what fucked up requests and/or porn I convert around does not seem like such a particularly good idea...

>do you mean decoding? encoding isn't something that needs to be particularly fast
No, I actually do mean encoding. It's the thrill of creating semi-OCs and squeezing every last ounce of quality out of the encoder within 4096 kilobytes.

Decoding speed is fine as it is. Even my 5-year old budget notebook can decode 1080p@60fps VP9s with just the occasional stammer.

Multiple images and videos per post sounds like a horrible idea and hack on top of the imageboard idea unless you are embedding these things from other sites in your post.

The only reason to do multiple images is for dumping manga or storyboarding, and multiple videos are mostly used for argument discussion purposes. All of those work fine as they are with one piece of media posted per post.

encoding speed on craptops isn't a use case worth supporting, you want to make video you get a real computer

>wonder for months how some videos look stupidly clean at 1080p
>see they are all video/webm; codecs="vp9"
>start uploading in -crf 0 VP9 webm
>Mime Type:video/mp4; codecs="avc1.640028"

What the fuck does this site want from me?

>encoding speed on craptops isn't a use case worth supporting, you want to make video you get a real computer
Tell that to the crappy proprietary x264 encoder which is at least twice as fast on those very same craptops.

Google should get their shit together and optimise their encoders.

WebM is a container. The webserver doesn't need to know what codecs are being used, simply that .webm extension should be treated differently and your web browser handles the rest. The only logical reason I can think of are issues with buffering the file inside threads which could be resolved by right clicking and opening up the url separately. Sup Forums is woefully behind the times, and this is what gives it charm. It is a genuine mystery why they would go out of their way to parse the uploaded files for what codecs are being used and reject them based on this. I wish Hiroshima would go into detail, but I think he got sick of people calling him a faggot and no longer communicates with us one on one.

Upon further inspection, buffering is handled by the client webbrowser and should not be affected in any way. I don't know what the reasons are, but they aren't technical. Sup Forums hates the VP9 codec and wants everyone to know they can prevent it from being used. This is purposely being done.

I can't believe this notion of VP9 taking a lot of time still remains. Nobody seems to be aware of the -speed flag.

With speed 4 on the first pass and speed 1-2 on the second, you're like 10% slower than with VP8.

Is there a proper guide on encoding for vp9? What flags do people usually use?

Wew lad, nice double trips :^)

I still have no idea why it isn't supported. This kind of a site is a perfect use case for the codec and with the strict file size limitations the site imposes, a more compression efficient codec could do wonders to the quality.

There is no reason why VP9 should be exclusive. Let the VP8 stay just like it is now. I don't really have an issue with encoding times when we are doing short clips under 3 MB in size. Even at sub one frame a second it doesn't take incredibly long to get a file uploaded here.

Encoding even vp8 at 360p is slow for me, but I can manage it. Webms for Sup Forums can't be long because of the size limit anyway.

Why would you use that when you could just use ffmpeg?

I was hoping when Hiro took over we'd see VP9 and site wide audio during his big sweep of changes but all we got was /his/ and /qst/ and some new banners.

Sup Forums should also support Opus

>If Sup Forums used VP9 exclusively, half the content on /wsg/ and /gif/ simply would never be created.
That wouldn't be a problem if Sup Forums would support both VP8 and VP9.

>tfw your Youtube account finally got vp9 priority for videos

This shit is amazing, all my previous uploads which were defaulting to avc1 look like ass in comparison.

Is it on a per account basis or per video basis? How do I get in on this shit?

It wasn't ready when moot introduced webm. Moot is gone so it will never happen now.

There appear to be many ways to get it, though none are officially confirmed (Google is tight lipped on youtubes inner workings) the community so far has found a few ways it seems to works

1) Be popular.

Huge channels got VP9 almost instantly when it was added, this is no coincidense

2) Get lucky or maybe be older.

It appears random accounts get vp9 priority out of the blue. This is either random or based on account age seniority

3) Upload higher resolutions.

This is the easiest one. Google wants to save on bandwidth costs with vp9, and the best way to get yourself vp9 is to upload 1440p or 4K videos. This will get your video into the vp9 queue and all resolutions over 720p will get vp9 codec encoding (but it takes a few days, it'll be avc1 in the mean time)

So for you to choose to get vp9, you have to go with option 3, it's the only factor you can control. Keep in mind that youtube has shitty bandwidth limits the resolutions, even if you are just recording 1080, just upscale that shit to1 440p before upload. Even upscaled 1080p looks better at 1440p simply because you get a lot higher bitrate at 1440p over 1080p.

> Multiple images and videos per post sounds like a horrible idea
Actually, no, there are some boards that allow up to 4 files per post (with a total size limit ofc) and there's no real way to abuse it. In fact, it's a lot better in some cases.

>tfw no apng
>tfw no vp9
>tfw no sound on all boards

>apng
>not webp
Fuck off and go back to SJWzilla. Webp would've made web better if Mozilla actually decided to support it in their shitty browser.

apng has first frame bc with unsupported png implementations.

Webp is way better. Have you messed around with it? Can you show me a format that can store lossy pictures with transparency?

HOW ABOUT WE GET SOME FUCKING SOUNDS ON OUR WEBMS FIRST

/GIF/ AND /WSG/ HAVE HAD NO PROBLEMS SO FUCKING ENABLE IT SITEWIDE ALREADY

fine
>tfw no webp

Not like it matters because japmoot wont be supporting shit.

>tripfags and people who write with CAPSLOCK want sound
>GIVE ME ATTENTION
Not surprising.

irrelevant but when use handbrake to convert a file to h.265 the result video is pixelated (big blocks not of a size of a pixel) whatever i set the settings on or speed of the convertion. What i do wrong?

Your bitrate might be too low.

Set crf to 28 (or lower) to get a higher bitrate. I guess the option is located in the video tab but i'm not sure since i'm using ffmpeg to encode to hevc.

if crf controls the bitrate i tried 20crf on slow, still same results

i3 is enough to encode small meme videos.

Opus is also not supported (on wsg), although to be honest Opus compatibility isn't perfect.

But there is no logical reason not to support VP9. It's just Hiroshima being a lazy chink.

>If Sup Forums used VP9 exclusively,
There's no need for it to be exclusive, you dumb fuck.

Have you tried to set the bitrate manually ? Set it to something like 2-5K for a great quality. If the problem is still here, are you upscaling the video (720p to 1080p) ? If not then try another video encoder, i never had any problem with x265 (except it's really slow) but there might be a problem with handbrake.

Nice digits. But anyway it's because m00two is an incompetent admin and technologically behind the times like with most nips. Beyond trying to make anime real of course

I don't know why we couldn't just have both.

For decoding? I've not seen anything in use for at least a year now that couldn't handle both VP8 and VP9 decoding.
As for encoding, you'd use VP8 if you didn't have the power to encode VP9.

Sound? I don't know why they can't just do like the default CSS on /wsg/ does (or did). Mute sound by default, but allow it to exist.

>I doubt that you will see support widespread until they make hardware with it.
AV1 has hardware partners out the ass, Intel, Cisco, ARM, AMD, Nvidia, etc.

Google already announced plans to move ALL 4k youtube videos to AV1 within 6 months of a finalized bitstream, which is expected in Q1 2017.

I'd be shocked if we didn't see decent AV1 support by the end of 2017/2018

>What i do wrong?
You don't use ffmpeg

And works pretty well because of the alpha in inter frames. Compresses porn greatly.

>Google already announced plans to move ALL 4k youtube videos to AV1 within 6 months of a finalized bitstream, which is expected in Q1 2017.

Wow, what cretins. Their VP9 encoder is terrible for quality 3 years after initial format release, and they think AVĀ“1 won't suck balls massively 6 month after freeze?

Note that AV1 encoder is based on libpx. So expect the same snafu as with VP8, VP9 (and VP7, VP6...). I wanted to cry when I learned that, after rooting for Daala success since 2011. I was looking forward to it back when it had no fancy demos, not even its own IRC channel and it only existed on one Xiph wikipage and in #Theora convos.

But Daala failed and only serves as a source of few patches for bloody VP10. Such a disappointment, fuck AV1. At least we have semi-decent x265 to use.

AV1 is going to destroy HEVC, if you think anyone outside the bluray/TV industry will be using HEVC you're insane.

Netflix, youtube, Amazon, adobe, etc. All are partnered with AV1, and since it's royalty free this list will grow when the spec is finalized.


You have basically the entire computer/web industry working on AV1, then you have MPAA and movie/TV industry pushing HEVC.

>AV1 is going to destroy HEVC
Based on? Your belief in open source software?
You should remember that HEVC was made in open process, by great number of experts and organisations. After all, VP9 just copied some of it to make an inferior "alternative".

>You have basically the entire computer/web industry working on AV1,
Those guys won't write a functional encoder.
Google couldn't, in 8 years since VOn2 acquisition. Netflix, Amazon, Adobe - none are codec developers. And so on.

> then you have MPAA and movie/TV industry pushing HEVC.

Dude, MPAA has nothing to do with this. MPEG technology is developed by people in MPEG/VCEG/ITU, but also academia/industry-run teams and independent people. Just get rid of your kiddy bias and fight the powa goggles aalready if you want to seriously talk video coding technology.

Also I don't suppose that you ever got to seriously studying the relative quality of output of x264, x265 and libvpx if you blabber such bullshit.

You don't even know such basic fact that encoders take multiple years to just start approaching maturity. No experience with x264, x265 at your end, is there. Libvpx wasn't helped by time so I leave it aside.

Because Sup Forums is a shit.

It actually uses ffmpeg as a backend. If you're talking about why don't I encode videos locally, it's because my computer isn't the fastest at it.

ask moot

Because he works at google and webm is a google thing.

>Based on?
well money really.

HEVC is expensive as fuck and we still dont even know the final cost of the royalties.

AV1 is royalty free and has widespread support from MAJOR industry players, netflix, amazon, youtube, etc. 3 of the larger players in streaming media in terms of volume of traffic.

If AV1 allows them to reduce bandwidth significantly without having to pay out the ass for HEVC royalties, they're going to do it.

Pair that with the fact AMD, ARM, Intel, and Nvidia are all hardware partners, you can expect to see widespread hardware encode/decode support very quickly.

...

>Encoding VP9 on hardware weaker than say a desktop core i7 is a total bitch.
Nobody's forcing you to use it

>It is a genuine mystery why they would go out of their way to parse the uploaded files for what codecs are being used and reject them based on this.
I can think of 10 good reasons for this without even trying

>So for you to choose to get vp9, you have to go with option 3, it's the only factor you can control. Keep in mind that youtube has shitty bandwidth limits the resolutions, even if you are just recording 1080, just upscale that shit to1 440p before upload. Even upscaled 1080p looks better at 1440p simply because you get a lot higher bitrate at 1440p over 1080p.
I believe 2160p is the sweet spot for youtube bitrate / resolution

>Can you show me a format that can store lossy pictures with transparency?
lossy FLIF

My 2500k 4.5Ghz is already struggling to record 1080p30 so I'm not sure about 1440p, but on the other hand 720p x2 will be infinitely easier for me, but upscaling doesn't look nice unless if it's video/filmic content.

You don't need to record at 1440p, just take your video file and upscale it to 2160p before uploading

I know but for content like games, upscaling might look too noticable even with a shit ton of MSAA and SSAA combined. BUT on the other hand, I am recording in raw RGB so upscaling won't produce any ugly artifacts. I'll try it.

Just make sure you use a good upscaling algorithm (e.g. lanczos or jinc)

What's the best program to offer jinc? I've been using VirtualDub and it only goes up to Lanczos.

images: imagemagick
video playback: mpv
video transcoding: no idea, ask on #mpv