4

Just wondering if I should go with FFMPEG or is there a better alternative for processing videos?

Thanks !

dallasclark
  • 741
  • 2
  • 7
  • 17
  • 1
    better in what way: Do you need faster processing? Higher quality? Support for lots of options? – Rob Moir Sep 29 '10 at 08:40
  • Support for lots of different formats would be the biggest factor and quality straight after. I should note, I'm only concerned about using FFMPEG or another product for converting videos uploaded by users to a website. – dallasclark Sep 30 '10 at 11:36
  • there are many kinds of FFMPEG and it grows in potential every year. But perhaps look at Quicktime if you are searching commercial-grade quality - but it can hardly be as universal as ffmpeg, though sometimes follow specifications better. – Qiqi Jan 30 '11 at 03:47

4 Answers4

3

I've used ffmpeg for a long time and for different encoding/decoding purposes. I find it very reliable. MPlayer, Mencoder and VLC are good players which are based on the ffmpeg library, so you could use them for easier syntax and extended functionality.

And a side note: VLC is not only a great player, but also an extremly powerful streaming media server. Using VLC you can also transcode, compress/decompress various files and formats.

Avada Kedavra
  • 1,244
  • 2
  • 13
  • 19
1

MEncoder is a free command line video decoding(http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/news.html)

bindbn
  • 5,153
  • 2
  • 26
  • 23
1

.. What do you - ahem - mean - by "processing videos". :)

.. Taking the tors and abracadabra its a dvd? Handbrake comes to mind.

All in all, most tmux/tcoders now are within +/- 10% of each other .. If you're looking for serious video work, you should be working with commercialware, or more specifically - multisocket hardware solutions..

If you're just trying to watch "Saw.V.1080p.BLU-RAY.screener.HTDV-LOL.mkv" [ ;) ] on your flat screen, there are options way better (streambaby, ps3media*, mt, playon etc).

Perhaps a little more context would help responses..?

jamie rishaw
  • 106
  • 1
0

I would consider Rhozet to be slightly better than ffmpeg, in fact Rhozet uses ffmpeg for some transcodes. http://www.rhozet.com/carbon_coder.html

Adobe even dropped their encoding software in their latest version and pushes everyone towards Rhozet.

Don't get me wrong, ffmpeg is an amazing open source tool but getting it to do exactly what you need may require a bit of extra work. As for open source tools I would say ffmpeg is the best out there.

In short, Rhozet is "expensive" but a great and scalable tool, whereas ffmpeg is free but may require a bit of work for your needs.

pablo
  • 3,020
  • 1
  • 18
  • 23