LinuxQuestions.org
Did you know LQ has a Linux Hardware Compatibility List?
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 06-04-2010, 08:16 AM   #1
martvefun
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Archlinux
Posts: 53

Rep: Reputation: 1
should I and how can I encode videos with VP8 ?


Hello,

I've a few dvd I'd like to rip to carry on my laptop for the next holidays.
For the audio, I use Vorbis, I know it's a good codec, but for the video Theora wasn't good enough compared to H264.

I've heard about the VP8 codec that Google released in open source. It seems that it has good performances but I don't know if it'll be used a lot. I like using free software but I like also have good quality.

So I was wondering should I use it to encode my videos ?
Of course nobody can predict the future but do you have a guess about what's it likely to happen ?

And the second question (if yes to the first) : how can I encode it ?
I usually use mencoder but I don't think it can encode with this codec.

Thank you

(I wasn't sure about where to post it, sorry if it's not the right place)

Last edited by martvefun; 06-04-2010 at 08:57 AM.
 
Old 06-04-2010, 02:22 PM   #2
CoderMan
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2009
Location: Gemini Capsule 25164
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 375
Blog Entries: 24

Rep: Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by martvefun View Post
Hello,

I've a few dvd I'd like to rip to carry on my laptop for the next holidays.
For the audio, I use Vorbis, I know it's a good codec, but for the video Theora wasn't good enough compared to H264.

I've heard about the VP8 codec that Google released in open source. It seems that it has good performances but I don't know if it'll be used a lot. I like using free software but I like also have good quality.

So I was wondering should I use it to encode my videos ?
Of course nobody can predict the future but do you have a guess about what's it likely to happen ?

And the second question (if yes to the first) : how can I encode it ?
I usually use mencoder but I don't think it can encode with this codec.

Thank you

(I wasn't sure about where to post it, sorry if it's not the right place)
I am going to assume you mean encode the video /using Linux/, and encode it /for free/. I could be wrong, but I don't think this is quite possible yet. Google only announced that they are going to open source vp8 three weeks ago (source). The word is that VLC release candidate 1.1.0 includes vp8 support (source) but I don't know if that includes encoding as well as decoding.

As far as the "should I" component of your question: frankly, it really doesn't matter what codec you use, because you don't have permission to distribute your ripped movies anyway. Content providers, content distributors, and software designers are the ones who are going to be saved or skewered by the fallout of upcoming licensing decisions.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-04-2010, 02:43 PM   #3
David the H.
Bash Guru
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Osaka, Japan
Distribution: Debian sid + kde 3.5 & 4.4
Posts: 6,823

Rep: Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946
libvpx0 has apparently just appeared in the debian repositories, and it was automatically installed when I updated ffmpeg just now (from the debian-multimedia repositories), so I'd say that support for it is either already there, or soon to be added, in the newest builds of the major multimedia frameworks.

Unfortunately, the current build seems to have broken my ffmpeg, so I can't test it right now. All I get is an "error while loading shared libraries: libvpx.so.0:" at this time. But that will no doubt get fixed soon enough, then I can see how it works out.

As for whether you "should" use it, that's up to you. It has great promise, being nearly equivalent to h.264, completely free, and backed by one of the largest tech companies in the world. I'd say it has a great future.

Still, if it were me, I'd wait a few months until everything gets settled out and support for it becomes commonplace. It might be prudent to wait until later this year or early next year before jumping on the bandwagon.

Personally, I don't see why so many people criticize theora though. Sure, it may not be as good at compression as h.264, but it's not a bad codec. I see it as being equivalent to xvid, and a bit better than mpeg2, so it certainly "good enough" for most purposes.

edit: BTW, here's the website of the webm/vpx project.
http://www.webmproject.org/

Last edited by David the H.; 06-04-2010 at 02:48 PM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-05-2010, 04:52 AM   #4
martvefun
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Archlinux
Posts: 53

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1
@CoderMan : yes you assume right.
The "should" was not about distributing (anyway I was already using vorbis and matroska which are not the most popular codecs) but because the codec is maybe still under high development and maybe what I encode today won't works so well tomorrow. Or maybe (but it's not likely), this codec won't be used and everyone will forget about it (and no support).

@David : thanks I've found this command for ffmpeg but haven't tested it (and it's for an avi file to webm)
Code:
ffmpeg -i source.avi -f webm -vcodec libvpx destination.webm
I think I'll follow your advice and wait the next holidays to decide
(and you are right for my laptop screen, Theora is maybe enough)


Does someone know what's the advantage of WebM vs Matroska ? It seems to me they do both the same stuffs...
edit : ok I found this. It seems that WebM is made from mkv but especially for the web purpose

Last edited by martvefun; 06-05-2010 at 04:58 AM.
 
Old 06-05-2010, 09:19 AM   #5
David the H.
Bash Guru
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Osaka, Japan
Distribution: Debian sid + kde 3.5 & 4.4
Posts: 6,823

Rep: Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946Reputation: 1946
Just to make it completely clear, matroska isn't a codec, it's a container format. In this way it's like ogg or avi, but perhaps better because supports almost anything. It can contain audio, video, and subtitle streams encoded in just about any format you want, with theora+vorbis and h264+mp3/aac being common encodings used with it. And as you noted, the webm project has decided to use a modified version of it as their default container.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Google Open Sources VP8 Video Codec, Packs It Into WebM Video Format - Already LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 05-19-2010 06:11 PM
LXer: Google planning to open the VP8 video codec LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 04-14-2010 03:30 AM
LXer: Google to Open-source VP8 for HTML5 Video LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 04-14-2010 01:41 AM
LXer: VP8 Codec: FSF Encourages Free Video Standard LXer Syndicated Linux News 1 02-27-2010 01:06 AM
Video encode joeslomp Linux - Software 0 05-18-2004 05:13 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:12 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration