|
|
| nvid |
| Posted: Sep 11 2003, 09:32 AM |
 |
|
Unregistered
|
Hi All,
I've entered video hell... I want to put videos in my web pages...
I discovered that Internet Explorer supports a cool option to "img" (DYNSRC),
and I started using that. But I use mozilla for everything, so I quickly spotted that
its an IE-specific feature. So I switched to "embed", which works OK in IE (except
for the control-bar including itself in the height calculation...). But it still doesn't work
in Mozilla. There is a quicktime plugin for mozilla... but I can't get mozilla to open
any AVI/DVIX files I generate with virtualDub and any decent codec  ....
I suspect that if I got around to rebooting under linux, mozilla would work, since I've
seen various appropriate plugin projects. Or I could try using the activeX plugin in
Mozilla-windows, but that would be windows-only.... This is where I start crying....
There's an example here:
http://ciaran.deignan.free.fr/sg/d0908/couple.html
(yes, I've realised that the audio isn't compressed.... any suggestions on a "lowest
common denomitator" audio codec?)
thanks for any pointers, I know this isn't really a VirtualDub question. Its more
"Zen and the art of video distributation" 
Ciaran |
|
| Neo Neko |
 Posted: Sep 11 2003, 09:58 PM |
|
|
VirtualdubMod Alpha tester
Group: Vdubmod Alpha Testing Team
Posts: 474
Member No.: 24
Joined: 11-July 02
|
Why exactly do you need to do this? It seems kinda awkward and a waste of data transfer to be honest. Traditionally and really still today video is not meant to be specifically embeddable in a web page. To do this requires special plugins. But why do they need to view it in the web page. Why not simply launch them when they are requested by the traditional helper application? |
|
| nvid |
 Posted: Sep 12 2003, 07:47 AM |
|
|
Unregistered
|
Why do we like to put images in our web pages? Animated gifs?
Putting videos in a web page can be used for lots of things. The first thing
I did with videos was for a freinds wedding.... I'd used a digital camera,
I had lots of photos and little videos, and I wanted do do "something".
I started by making a little film... but my videos were a bit shot, the was
no sound, etc.. So I built up a few web pages, one for the photos, one
for the videos... And the video web page "worked" great! You could look
at several videos at the same time, or look at one video over and over again...
The user gets to control the experience- perfect! Do you want the URL?
Currently I'm looking to document salsa dancing moves. So I want a web page
with one or two videos showing the move from different angles, and associated
text. OK, the video won't print Check out the link on my original post...
There's no waste of data transfer, and in fact from the proxy configuration standpoint
it simplifies things... My Windows Media Player in work never seems to be able to
connect to a video lonk, but it works fine with my embedded videos - its the web
browser that does the transfer...
|
|
| Neo Neko |
 Posted: Sep 13 2003, 02:27 AM |
|
|
VirtualdubMod Alpha tester
Group: Vdubmod Alpha Testing Team
Posts: 474
Member No.: 24
Joined: 11-July 02
|
| QUOTE (nvid @ Sep 12 2003, 01:47 AM) | Why do we like to put images in our web pages? Animated gifs?
|
We put them in mostly to break up the text. Added interest is a side benefit. The fact is that even animated GIFs are rather rare.
| QUOTE (nvid @ Sep 12 2003, 01:47 AM) | Putting videos in a web page can be used for lots of things.
|
The real issue is whether or not you should use them. And if it is really nescessary to put them in the page itself.
| QUOTE (nvid @ Sep 12 2003, 01:47 AM) | The first thing
I did with videos was for a freinds wedding.... I'd used a digital camera,
I had lots of photos and little videos, and I wanted do do "something".
I started by making a little film...
|
I'll be doing that myself tomorrow as my sister is getting married.  What is the nescessity to put them in the page itself? Perhaps a simple placeholder image and "maybe" an animated GIF or MNG. You could then link them to load the clip externaly upon the visitors demand.
| QUOTE (nvid @ Sep 12 2003, 01:47 AM) | but my videos were a bit shot, the was
no sound, etc.. So I built up a few web pages, one for the photos, one
for the videos... And the video web page "worked" great! You could look
at several videos at the same time, or look at one video over and over again...
|
But if they all load all at once on one page can you really look at them one at a time. And if you are going to look at them one at a time what's the use in loading them all in one go on one page. Depending on their size each can slow down loading of the others.
| QUOTE (nvid @ Sep 12 2003, 01:47 AM) | The user gets to control the experience- perfect! Do you want the URL?
|
No I know exactly what you are talking about. What I am saying is; is it really necessary?
| QUOTE (nvid @ Sep 12 2003, 01:47 AM) | Currently I'm looking to document salsa dancing moves. So I want a web page
with one or two videos showing the move from different angles, and associated
text. OK, the video won't print Check out the link on my original post...
|
Wouldn't a linked static image placeholder be just as effective if not more so.
| QUOTE (nvid @ Sep 12 2003, 01:47 AM) | There's no waste of data transfer, and in fact from the proxy configuration standpoint
it simplifies things... My Windows Media Player in work never seems to be able to
connect to a video lonk, but it works fine with my embedded videos - its the web
browser that does the transfer... |
Windows Media Player, Quicktime Player, and Real Player can all load videos via the HTML Hyper Text Transfer Protocol exactly as the browser can. What do you think is playing the video in your browser? Not the browser. Nosirre! Browsers do not play video. Browsers parse and display markup text and a small number of image formats. And that is the extent of the browsers capability. To do anything else. Anything at all; requires plugins. Even WAV or MIDI files. Plugins are not all created equal, and really are required depending on the format used. And in order for someone to use your plugin content they must have already downloaded and installed said plugin. There is no universal or easy solution to embedd all video in web pages. Simply because it is generally not needed and is actually kind of bad ettiquete. There is no quicker way to get dialup users bitching than to embed more than one video in a web page. Not to mention system resources. Every video embeded in a web page requires an instance of the player application. Which can quickly gobble up RAM and CPU cycles. Not to mention that there is only one video overlay and it must be shared between all open instances. The best, most efficient, safest, surefire, and professional way to do this would be to load the clips externally in the appropriate traditional helper application upon request. Granted your pages are mostly for friends and family. But professionaly more than one video on a page is taboo. And generally those pages don't include text. And when I find those pages myself I think to myself how much better it would be had it loaded in a media player instead. Sorry I can't be any more help. All I can do is offer you professional web design tips. |
|
|
