Any Developers Out There to Add HuffYUV to MediaExpress ?

[dellsam34]

I've contacted BlackMagic Design about the possibility of adding HuffYUV as an output to their list of option during capturing using MediaExpress which is part of their tool suit called Desktop Video, They told me they will submit a feature request but they cannot guarantee it will go through. However they said there is a Desktop Video SDK for developers who would like to build their own application which I attached to this post, So I was wondering if this is something knowledgeable members of this forum can do, What do you guys think?

[Truthler]

_____________________

[Truthler]

I've contacted BlackMagic Design about the possibility of adding HuffYUV as an output to their list of option during capturing using MediaExpress which is part of their tool suit called Desktop Video, They told me they will submit a feature request but they cannot guarantee it will go through. However they said there is a Desktop Video SDK for developers who would like to build their own application which I attached to this post, So I was wondering if this is something knowledgeable members of this forum can do, What do you guys think?

Hi!

Can you tell me why do you use the very backward Huffyuv istead of the more modern Ut video codec?

[dellsam34]

Can you tell me why you have two posts and why do you have to include the picture in the quote? Anyway, Where do you see UTI on the list above?

[Truthler]

Can you tell me why you have two posts and why do you have to include the picture in the quote? Anyway, Where do you see UTI on the list above?

I still can't understand why don't you ask about the adoption of utvideo from the software developer? Can you explain it? Ut video is more versatile and has higher compression ratio.

Why do you use Mediaexpress? It is not a really advanced and sophisticated software.

[dellsam34]

In the analog video capturing world we use HuffYUV (lossless compression), QTGMC, FFMPEG, I never tried something else, never will. MediaExpress works better with my hardware which is made by the same manufacturer. Hope this answers the unnecessary questions.

[Truthler]

In the analog video capturing world we use HuffYUV (lossless compression), QTGMC, FFMPEG, never tried something else, never will. MediaExpress works better with my hardware which is made by the same manufacturer. Hope this answers the unnecessary questions.

I still can't understand, because utvideo is also a part of FFMPEG.
For video capture the Virtualdub2 and OBS studio are vastly superior.

[dellsam34]

OBS is a screen capture not a video source capture, Ok lets move on now. To the coders out there is this something that can be done or is it bigger than the VHS decode project?

[Cornucopia]

Why would someone pick DNXHD vs ProRes or Cineform. or HQX? Same thing: workflow and compatibility, and applicability.

Sometimes it makes more sense to be LESS compressed, because it can put less of a burden on a CPU.


Most of the codecs are built for a particular API: VFW, DirectShow, Quicktime, ffmpeg. BlackMagic isn't designing their app for ffmpeg, per se, so it makes less sense as an argument to push for (until BMD adds ffmpeg support).

Look at what Voukoder has done for Premiere. That's probably a better suggestion for BMD. Or just try doing it yourself, Truthler.


Scott

[dellsam34]

I do Betacam SP and DigiBeta transfers from SDI using MediaExpress and I have to do an extra step which is converting to HuffYUV YUV2 in vdub2 to get QTGMC to accept the files, It would be a lot easier to have compliant captured files, But I guess BM is busy with HD and UHD stuff I don't think they care about SD.

[Truthler]

OBS is a screen capture not a video source capture, Ok lets move on now. To the coders out there is this something that can be done or is it bigger than the VHS decode project?

The main profile of OBS is video capture and streaming software. 90% of Youtube video blogs were recorded with OBS!

[dellsam34]

Well I don't do streaming and screen capture, I do analog video capturing, it requires a different set of tools. Just submit your own request to BM if such a codec is important to you.

[Truthler]

Well I don't do streaming and screen capture, I do analog video capturing, it requires a different set of tools. Just submit your own request to BM if such a codec is important to you.

I don't know why did you mention screen capture, it is only a side function of OBS. I think you have no clue what is OBS.

For start, read this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Broadcaster_Software

Its main function is video capture (from any devices) and streaming. For capturing it is de-facto the best and most advanced capture software on this planet. It is much much more advanced than your simple capture software what you get from the factory of your device.
It really knows all types of compressions what FFMPEG can provide

[Barrythecrab]

This should be fun...

[dellsam34]

Yes if you know how to work on SDK packages it should be fun, I think we should wait and see if BlackMagic will consider such a feature.

[Truthler]

Yes if you know how to work on SDK packages it should be fun, I think we should wait and see if BlackMagic will consider such a feature.

Blackmagic (similar to all other Hardware manufacturer) does not provide sophisticated capture softwares at all.

Watch Youtube videos how to handle Blackmagic HW in OBS studio.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=BlackMagic+OBS

I started capture videos with primitive PC TV tuners around 1998, when most of the forum members (Even the older ones) did not even believe that Television is possible on PC, because that time capturing with computer was close to unknown yet. (except movie studios which used digital technology since the late 1970s)

Just to have a minimal clue, how rare were the devices for capture and Tv tuners that time: http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/9706/25/pc.tv.lat/

[Truthler]

Why would someone pick DNXHD vs ProRes or Cineform. or HQX? Same thing: workflow and compatibility, and applicability.

Sometimes it makes more sense to be LESS compressed, because it can put less of a burden on a CPU.


Most of the codecs are built for a particular API: VFW, DirectShow, Quicktime, ffmpeg. BlackMagic is designing their app for ffmpeg, per se, so it makes less sense as an argument to push for (until BMD adds ffmpeg support).

Look at what Voukoder has done for Premiere. That's probably a better suggestion for BMD. Or just try doing it yourself, Truthler.


Scott

Cineform and Prores are for people who had not enough internet speed for uploading (over 2Gb/s) and/or who have not enough HDD space. Buy some fast 16TB HDDS, and you can use them with Utvideo for lossless capture and lossless edit too. Cineform and Prores requiresmore cpu power than Utvideo.

[Truthler]

This should be fun...

Exactly.

[Truthler]

Why would someone pick DNXHD vs ProRes or Cineform. or HQX? Same thing: workflow and compatibility, and applicability.

Sometimes it makes more sense to be LESS compressed, because it can put less of a burden on a CPU.


Most of the codecs are built for a particular API: VFW, DirectShow, Quicktime, ffmpeg. BlackMagic is designing their app for ffmpeg, per se, so it makes less sense as an argument to push for (until BMD adds ffmpeg support).

Look at what Voukoder has done for Premiere. That's probably a better suggestion for BMD. Or just try doing it yourself, Truthler.


Scott

A new topic: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/400004-Do-we-really-need-Cineform-and-Prores-even-in-the-2020s

[dellsam34]

I think you should stop hijacking the thread, This thread is about a specific application called MediaExpress not OBS, And once again I don't do live streaming.

[Truthler]

I think you should stop hijacking the thread, This thread is about a specific application called MediaExpress not OBS, And once again I don't do live streaming.

I wanted to help you, but you make only personal attacks.
I feel sorry for you, if the OBS is too complicated for you.



First: You claimed that OBS is not good for Blackmagic stuff. I refuted your belief. So your statement was FALSE.
Second, You come up the OBS is only for screen recording. I refuted your belief. So your statement was FALSE.
Third, You claimed that OBS is only for streaming................ I refuted your belief. So your statement was FALSE.

It is the best software for video capture for any possible devices. It can use all codecs which is available on FFMPEG for capture.

You humiliated yourself in this forum. You made a mockery of yourself. I really feel sorry for you.
Do you know what I feel? Vicarious embarrassment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicarious_embarrassment

Vicarious embarrassment (also known as secondhand, empathetic, or third-party embarrassment) is the feeling of embarrassment from observing the embarrassing actions of another person. Unlike general embarrassment, vicarious embarrassment is not caused by participating in an embarrassing event, but instead by witnessing (verbally and/or visually) another person experience an embarrassing event. These emotions can be perceived as pro-social, and some say they can be seen as motives for following socially and culturally acceptable behavior.[1][2]

[Cornucopia]

@TRuthler,
I like OBS as much as the next fellow, but

1. While OBS might be workable with BMD stuff, it is NOT optimal. Unless there are workarounds/plugins/drivers exposing a cap card as a webcam, it might not be compatible.
2. OBS is primarily, though not solely, capable of screen capture. Most everything else is built on top of that.
3. OBS is primarily designed to output via streaming, and secondarily for recording. It's recording features still leave much to be desired.

Do you have any assistance or knowledge regarding MediaExpress? I thought not.


Scott

[dellsam34]

You humiliated yourself in this forum. You made a mockery of yourself. I really feel sorry for you.
Do you know what I feel? Vicarious embarrassment

I think you are the one embarrassing yourself, claiming to have knowledge and yet none of your posts shed a bit of help other than none sense crap, Reported to the mods.

[Baldrick]

Please discuss MediaExpress and not OBS Studio in this thread. I will clean up after the holidays.

[lordsmurf]

Ut video is more versatile and has higher compression ratio.

It's not "more versatile" (what does that even mean here???), and more compression = more dropped frames risk. Utvideo is a really bad capturing codec. It's more ideal as a post-capture intermediary, however time will not be kind to it (and hasn't already). Lagarith and Huffyuv will outlast it, and longevity of archives can be an important consideration.

I don't know why did you mention screen capture, it is only a side function of OBS. I think you have no clue what is OBS.

It "side" functions badly. It does not provide the workflow needed for quality capture. Yes, you can do half-ass capture with it, but that is/was true of several analog capture tools. NLEs like Premiere have craptastic capture functions as well. Nobody that cares about quality uses those.

Its main function is video capture

No. The main functions is streaming "capture". It's not the same, not at all.

BTW, streaming capture is merely a fancy term for downloading (or at least was, it's very vague these days, misused mainstream). Not much different from DV "capture". The term "stream capture" existed long before the interwebs had video. Most often, we'd capture satellite streams. And "capture" was arguably the wrong term all along, because it was a download (in digital realm, capture=download, term usurped; in analog video, capture=ingest). But it was more accurate for live broadcast (ie, again, satellite grabbing stream), more than non-live DV. So OBS isn't really capturing streams at all. youtube-dl is more of a stream capture tool than OBS, using this definition.

Streaming recording is just "screen capture" (screen recording). This is what OBS does.

Analog capturing is neither.

For capturing it is de-facto the best and most advanced capture software on this planet.

No. The best is VirtualDub, and in Windows (and preferably XP or 7, as to not cause dropped frames from unwanted OS activity)

It really knows all types of compressions what FFMPEG can provide

ffmpeg is not good in any way for SD analog video capture. Zero advantages.

I've contacted BlackMagic Design about the possibility of adding HuffYUV as an output to their list of option during capturing using MediaExpress which is part of their tool suit called Desktop Video, They told me they will submit a feature request but they cannot guarantee it will go through. However they said there is a Desktop Video SDK for developers who would like to build their own application which I attached to this post, So I was wondering if this is something knowledgeable members of this forum can do, What do you guys think?

Now the the peanut gallery has been handled...

Back up. What is this being used for? Your SDI workflow with Betacam/etc sources? (EDIT: I see you mentioned that in a late post. But still not sure of handshakes here, where MediaExpress enters fray.)

Honestly, if they won't even support ProRes422 in that list, you have no chance with getting Huffyuv added. That options list from the software is terrible. (Sadly, those options are not much better than OBS, which sucks partially because of that reason [but also others].)

[dellsam34]

The problem is that when capturing Betacam tapes over SDI the only application that works is MediaExpress, I tried all versions of vdub and they all stutter, Not sure if it has anything to do with the video signal itself being different from consumer formats or something else, Using MediaExpress works fine but I have to do an extra pass with vdub2 to get HuffYUV YUV2 and resume my normal workflow as I would for VHS or 8mm in terms of de-interlacing and encoding, That's why the need to output as HuffYUV arose to avoid that extra step of converting to HuffYUV after capturing.

[Truthler]

Ut video is more versatile and has higher compression ratio.

It's not "more versatile" (what does that even mean here???), and more compression = more dropped frames risk. Utvideo is a really bad capturing codec. It's more ideal as a post-capture intermediary, however time will not be kind to it (and hasn't already). Lagarith and Huffyuv will outlast it, and longevity of archives can be an important consideration.

I don't know why did you mention screen capture, it is only a side function of OBS. I think you have no clue what is OBS.

It "side" functions badly. It does not provide the workflow needed for quality capture. Yes, you can do half-ass capture with it, but that is/was true of several analog capture tools. NLEs like Premiere have craptastic capture functions as well. Nobody that cares about quality uses those.

Its main function is video capture

No. The main functions is streaming "capture". It's not the same, not at all.

BTW, streaming capture is merely a fancy term for downloading (or at least was, it's very vague these days, misused mainstream). Not much different from DV "capture". The term "stream capture" existed long before the interwebs had video. Most often, we'd capture satellite streams. And "capture" was arguably the wrong term all along, because it was a download (in digital realm, capture=download, term usurped; in analog video, capture=ingest). But it was more accurate for live broadcast (ie, again, satellite grabbing stream), more than non-live DV. So OBS isn't really capturing streams at all. youtube-dl is more of a stream capture tool than OBS, using this definition.

Streaming recording is just "screen capture" (screen recording). This is what OBS does.

Analog capturing is neither.

For capturing it is de-facto the best and most advanced capture software on this planet.

No. The best is VirtualDub, and in Windows (and preferably XP or 7, as to not cause dropped frames from unwanted OS activity)

It really knows all types of compressions what FFMPEG can provide

ffmpeg is not good in any way for SD analog video capture. Zero advantages.

I've contacted BlackMagic Design about the possibility of adding HuffYUV as an output to their list of option during capturing using MediaExpress which is part of their tool suit called Desktop Video, They told me they will submit a feature request but they cannot guarantee it will go through. However they said there is a Desktop Video SDK for developers who would like to build their own application which I attached to this post, So I was wondering if this is something knowledgeable members of this forum can do, What do you guys think?

Now the the peanut gallery has been handled...

Back up. What is this being used for? Your SDI workflow with Betacam/etc sources? (EDIT: I see you mentioned that in a late post. But still not sure of handshakes here, where MediaExpress enters fray.)

Honestly, if they won't even support ProRes422 in that list, you have no chance with getting Huffyuv added. That options list from the software is terrible. (Sadly, those options are not much better than OBS, which sucks partially because of that reason [but also others].)

Ut Video has better compression ratio than lagarith or Huffyuv, and Ut video has also faster encoding and decoding (on modern CPUs). Ut Video is an advanced version of Huffyuv.
It is more versatile, because it supports utmost all available color spaces in YUV and RGB empires.

You confused streaming capture with real capture mode. In OBS you can select between the two capture mode.
You can capture 4K and even 8K video source (if you have) even on a simple 1080p laptop. Why? Because OBS is not screen recorder if you select real capture mode.

What does OBS make superior to all other capture software? The full potential of available container formats (more than 40 container formats) and if you chose Matoska container, it has more than 50 video codecs & audio codecs! No other capture software can offer so many formats on this planet.

I t can use the full potential of FFMPEG. You can use your Nvidia cards too (both HEVC and H264, even in NVENC AVC and HEVC lossless formats.

Just watch this 1 min short video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NK2D21HjRMY

[Truthler]

Please discuss MediaExpress and not OBS Studio in this thread. I will clean up after the holidays.

Baldrick, Please move this topic to the right place, it does not belong to "video conversion" topic, but it belongs to the "Capturing" topic.

Thank you!

[Truthler]

I've contacted BlackMagic Design about the possibility of adding HuffYUV as an output to their list of option during capturing using MediaExpress which is part of their tool suit called Desktop Video, They told me they will submit a feature request but they cannot guarantee it will go through. However they said there is a Desktop Video SDK for developers who would like to build their own application which I attached to this post, So I was wondering if this is something knowledgeable members of this forum can do, What do you guys think?

Video about: How to use Blackmagic DeckLink with OBS:

https://youtu.be/7fYaixATWgA

[Cornucopia]

That video doesn't show that and you know it - it's just about overlays (and it misses a number of other, perhaps better options).

The only reason that can appear as a video source in OBS is because that model comes with a driver that exposes it as a webcam. As I already mentioned. No driver, no video. That's thanks to that manufacturer not obs.
Also, I will make a guess, but it's been my experience that these kinds of uvc drivers rarely expose all the features of the card, so you are limited in what you can do with it using an app like obs.

Scott