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. |
8th June 2013, 02:33 | #1 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12
|
A good format most likely to be supported everywhere?
Hello, folks.
I'm wondering what would be the most widely supported format for video and audio these days? Meaning, if I were to create a video with audio in it, what format should the video and audio be in, and what container format should be chosen in order for people to be able to play it without the need to install any codecs/splitters (or any software) that doesn't already come with the default installation of their operating system? I should mention that features like chapter selection and multiple video and audio streams are not important in this case. From my own research on this, it seems like MP4 with H.264 video and either AAC or MP3 audio would be the surest bet; I believe they can be played out of the box on pretty much every PC or Mac, including many Linux systems. I've seen some people writing about AVI being the most supported format. Though in that case, what format should the video and audio be? But I really don't know that much about video formats. Any suggestions? It doesn't have to be just one format. If there's multiple formats that are very likely to work everywhere, that would give me an idea of the choices I have. Last edited by RealNC; 8th June 2013 at 02:36. Reason: Typos and grammar |
8th June 2013, 10:08 | #2 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 463
|
MP4/H.264/AAC is not supported on Windows XP without 3rd party decoders. So, two foramts, AVI/Divx(Xvid)/MP3 and MP4/H.264/AAC is probably way to go.
But I don't se the problem if files will be played on PC. Every PC user installs additional decoders or uses player with additional internal decoders. |
8th June 2013, 15:27 | #3 | Link |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
I'd go with H.264+AAC in MP4, which definitely should be the most common one today. Also supported in many browser as HTML5 video.
Indeed, Windows XP does not support H.264 out-of-the-box. But the same applies to MPEG-4 ASP (Xvid/DivX and friends). And you definitely don't want AVI with Indeo or Cinepak, the VFW Codecs that ship with Windows If you only are targeting Windows only, WMV might be your best bet on something that works out-of-the-box. But not so nice for our Linux friends. Anyway, I think it's pretty safe to assume the user will have/find some way to play H.264+AAC in MP4 nowadays. This is 2013, not 2003 Some people also suggest MPEG-2 as a widely supported format, but with Windows 8 they removed that...
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 8th June 2013 at 15:34. |
8th June 2013, 15:37 | #4 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4
|
I don't think a universal format which could be played on every player be available. It all depends on what codecs the system supports on which you try to play the video file.
^ I agree that MP4/AAC is not supported but Windows XP and I have gone through the problem when I was just a beginner. AVI with MP3 seemed to be a preferable option as it doesn't require any codecs to be installed, but then it is not supported by some mobile phones if you try to play it. So, it all depends on the system on which you try to play it. Lets see if any thing like that is available. Today everyone prefers the MKV format as it's pretty much supported by every other system - Recent DVD Players especially and with correct decoders used on your PC too. I doubt about mobile phones. Looking for the future ... |
8th June 2013, 15:41 | #5 | Link | |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
Quote:
Yes, starting with Windows 7 there is support for MPEG-4 ASP (DivX, etc) out-of-the-box, but there also is support for H.264/MP4, so the latter sounds like the preferable solution...
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 8th June 2013 at 15:45. |
|
9th June 2013, 13:10 | #6 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12
|
It seems MP4 with H.264 and AAC is indeed a very compatible format. And I suppose XP users already sorted that out on their own (and if not, I can always point them to ffdshow tryouts, I guess.) So thanks for the replies, guys.
|
10th June 2013, 06:27 | #7 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,104
|
It'd be easier to point to VLC.
__________________
MultiMakeMKV: MakeMKV batch processing (Win) MultiShrink: DVD Shrink batch processing Offizieller Übersetzer von DVD Shrink deutsch |
10th June 2013, 07:49 | #8 | Link |
47.952fps@71.928Hz
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 940
|
H.264/AAC inside either an MOV or MP4 container are popular on movie websites for trailer distribution.
Also WMV but that's severely limited. I don't see a machine where extra codecs have not been installed. I can't see it as a way of living. I maintain all the codecs and updates on my machines and those of my friends as well.
__________________
Win10 (x64) build 19041 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (GP106) 3071MB/GDDR5 | (r435_95-4) NTSC | DVD: R1 | BD: A AMD Ryzen 5 2600 @3.4GHz (6c/12th, I'm on AVX2 now!)
|
10th June 2013, 08:21 | #9 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,769
|
You mean "everywhere but on computers only"?
There are two issues here:
Commercial OSes, like Windows, may provide these codecs, if paid for. For instance MPEG-1 is in Windows XP, but MPEG-2 (DVD, DVB etc) not. And of course none of the newer formats like MPEG-4 and the like. Sometimes the user may become them with certain applications (like a DVD player) but these are extra and sometimes the codecs work only with the application that installed them. Macworld is an unknown to me territory. Anyway, the most compatible formats are those used for internet video, as they run in any browser. I have some reserves ( ) about their video quality. Some free players have some usual codecs already built-in, like VLC. Your target people may be hinted to download and install it.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA) |
10th June 2013, 11:29 | #10 | Link | |
Swallowed in the Sea
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Aix-en-Provence, France
Posts: 5,191
|
Quote:
that's not true everywhere regarding A/V codecs...never heard of Linux Mint ? Last edited by Kurtnoise; 10th June 2013 at 11:32. |
|
10th June 2013, 13:21 | #11 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,769
|
Quote:
Yes, I know that most people do use codecs without paying for it, by various tricks, including installing test versions of SW comprising those codecs, but this is not a solution. Quote:
But I fail to see how a singular solution solves the issue of universality as asked by the OP .... should we all give up the Windowses we paid 100€ (in the price of the laptop/desktop) and install Linux Mint? I always give the advice to stick with industrial standards.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA) |
||
11th June 2013, 05:01 | #12 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12
|
That won't work. This is for a game engine port I wrote that displays video on its own. On Linux I'm using GStreamer, on Windows DirectShow. Not sure yet about OS X, but I assume I'll be also relying on the locally installed codecs. Which is why I was inquiring about the most compatible format when it comes to out of the box codec support; this is what I'll be recommending people to use in their games.
|
11th June 2013, 05:19 | #13 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12
|
Quote:
Distributions that do ship these codecs usually share Debian's stance on this, which boils down to "we don't expect to be sent take-down notices, but if there is one, we can remove those codecs". From Debian's patent FAQ: Quote:
|
||
11th June 2013, 05:36 | #14 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 589
|
I would say the MOST COMPATIBLE with everything would be the old MPEG1. I'm not sure if all operating systems have native decoding capability but that's certainly not the case with AVI (divx, xvid codecs don't come built in) or with h264 (in the case of XP and older).
Other than lousy quality (even if you go overkill on bitrate), the format is almost 100% patent free, no licensing fees required, so you can easily make an open source/free player without worrying about it... there's even javascript players out there: http://phoboslab.org/log/2013/05/mpeg1-video-decoder-in-javascript If you also want quality and small space I'd go for h264 and aac in mp4 container. Should play on tv's, in blurays, software players support it... |
11th June 2013, 13:26 | #15 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,769
|
My linux doesn't have too many video codecs, for instance. My windows XP came without MPEG-2 (not that I care) and without H.264 codecs.
Also my TV doesn't play MP4 (or any other video), just JPEG photos. And my BDplayer refuses to play anything else than BD/AVCHD/DivX-in-AVI, certain restrictions apply. I am probably not the only one that won't dump valuable assets in the bin, and invest from 2000€ onwards for new equipment, just to watch a video . So it's difficult for you to find an universal format. I would suggest as well H.264, but I am confused, what has to do a game with a codec? Aren't they using DirectDraw, OpenGL and similar functions?
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA) |
11th June 2013, 16:30 | #16 | Link | |
SuperVirus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Antarctic Japan
Posts: 1,351
|
Quote:
Not all MPEG-1 encoders had to suck as much as the well-known open-source implementations, granted. |
|
11th June 2013, 19:16 | #18 | Link |
SuperVirus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Antarctic Japan
Posts: 1,351
|
According to what mariush had written, MPEG-1 would always suck, no matter how big the bitrate it was allowed to use, and regardless of the chosen encoder.
Last edited by Guest; 11th June 2013 at 19:25. Reason: rule 4 |
11th June 2013, 19:34 | #19 | Link | ||
The speed of stupid
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 317
|
Quote:
Quote:
I kind of doubt myself that even the best MPEG1 encoder would even scratch something like x264 - unless we go overkill on the MPEG1 bitrate so that it can match the quality. |
||
11th June 2013, 20:05 | #20 | Link |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Unfortunately it does suck. MPEG-1 is terribly inefficient compared to almost any other codec developed in the last 20+ years. Yes, MPEG-1 can be made to look good but you have to inflate the bitrate to well past what any other current, mainstream codec would need.
Last edited by paradoxical; 11th June 2013 at 20:08. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|