Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.


Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Announcements and Chat > General Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 9th February 2009, 20:11   #1  |  Link
Registered User
vladimirg's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 4
Job - Requesting H.264 encoding assistance & consulting


I am looking for a member on this forum who is familiar with encoding videos using h.264 encoder (while using AAC for audio).

The platform we're using is encoding.com, which is basically nothing but ffmpeg, but callable via a XML API, with less parameters to define.

Basically this is a quick consultation job, no programming is required, just helping us find the best parameters for encoding videos via encoding.com.

The API they provide is available here: http://encoding.com/wdocs/ApiDoc (look for "Format fields" headline, that's where you'll see the possible parameters [output: fl9], [video_codec: libx264]).

What is needed?

The service we mentioned is not as flexible as the command line ffmpeg scripting. It has less parameters to configure, however it's faster.

What we want to achieve is to:

- build a list of guidelines for our users, so our videos will look good after being resized and encoded with h.264
- make sure that all the videos are using low bit rates, but quality stays as good as the source was no matter if the source videos were optimised based on our guidelines or not (some people may never read them)

Where do the videos come from:
- everybody, so they may be low quality, high quality, raw format, mpeg, wmv, avi, mov, etc.

We can agree on how the payout is made, via odesk, paypal, wire, moneybookers, or anything out there.

Please PM me with some infromation on how you've been using h.264/AAC encoding for web, and maybe few links pointing to relevant information about your work.

Any other questions go on PM as well, and we can take it on email, skype or messenger from there.

Vladimir Ghetau
vladimirg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2009, 20:32   #2  |  Link
HDConvertToX author
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cesena,Italy
Posts: 6,552
i am no way interested BUT, this is from your api (i will list only "useful" video option)

<video_codec>[Video Codec]</video_codec>
<bitrate>[Video bitrate]</bitrate>
<rc_init_occupancy>[RC Occupancy]</rc_init_occupancy>
<minrate>[Min Rate]</minrate>
<maxrate>[Max Rate]</maxrate>
<bufsize>[RC Buffer Size]</bufsize>
<keyframe>[Keyframe Period (GOP)]</keyframe>
i not see "very specific" x264 options avaiable, and.. for sure not all ffmpeg options are present

for sure you will get outragenus encoding speed with these base options

maybe i missed something ?

HDConvertToX: your tool for BD backup
MultiX264: The quick gui for x264
AutoMen: The Mencoder GUI
AutoWebM: supporting WebM/VP8
buzzqw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2009, 00:49   #3  |  Link
Registered User
CruNcher's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,949
It's interesting such companies as encoding.com showing up now and in reality it's highly needed i conducting all the time Web Content Quality Surveys and looking @ those im shocked how many Content Producer still primarly use WMV exclusive mostly MP@HL even for HD Advanced Profile is very very rare and if they use H.264 in form most of the time of Quicktime some also Mainconcept how bad the Visual Quality is compared to the MP@HL Encodings is disgusting and makes no sense.
But it also shows that Microsoft's Codec team does a really good job in Default Tuning of their Encoders (and Encoding GUIs (easy presets)), but @ High Motion i saw most of the HD MP@HL or AP@HL Encodes @ Medium Web Bitrates fail all the time because of their very weak inloop deblocking in High Motion, there most of the times the H.264 encodes where better but Detail Preservation wise compared to the Source WMV Encodings always had a head start.
But this is only a Snapshot of the current situation and i guess it's to early yet to go into panic, i guess slowly companies like encoding.com also take their part in changing that and better free tools we gonna give Content Producers into their Hands developed for their needs are also hopefully gonna change this unbalanced quality we currently experience. Fact is without a way for Content Producer to easily be able to get the same Quality with the easiness they are used from Microsoft Products the goal is hard to achive, though im not sure if transforming this into a service based solution is the right way as many Content Producer will heavily try to avoid such unnecessary 3rd Party costs (especially the majority of small ones). Im sure we gonna soon see a lot of Web Content of H.264 being released as DivX H.264 at least that will be a more solid H.264 quality compared to the current situation, im talking only about Downloadable content not Streaming or Progressive Streaming content.
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :)

It is about Time

Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late !


Last edited by CruNcher; 10th February 2009 at 03:17.
CruNcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2009, 18:15   #4  |  Link
Registered User
vladimirg's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 4

you are right, encoding.com is limited, that means we can discuss alternatives as well.
vladimirg is offline   Reply With Quote

aac, encoding.com, h.264

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 23:12.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.