Live data from Hacker News

FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

git.ffmpeg.org

101–110 of 204 posts

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#101
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's layers. Docker is better than nothing, but a VM is better still, and even better is docker on a dedicated VM on dedicated hardware on a dedicated network segment.

That's sacrificing an awful lot of latency cost for each transcode job though.

Each job sends a provisioning ticket to a thermal printer. 1 business day turnaround, unless we need to order more servers

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#102
post #72
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, you are not wrong. I just asked Gemini "how can I use ffmpeg to apply a lower third image to a video?" and it gave a very detailed explanation of using an overlay filter. Have not tested its answer yet but on its face it looks legit.

It could very well be legit, but if you "have not tested its answer yet" the fact that it can generate something that looks plausible doesn't really tell you much. Generating plausible-sounding but incorrect answers is like the #1 most common failure mode for LLMs.

in recent usage, that only happens 10% of the time for me. Usually the results are grounded and so work usually fine.

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#103
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What sort of infrastructure do you need for scaling WebRTC multicast? Are we entering an era where you don't need Amazon's budget to host something like Twitch?

Yes we are :) When OBS merges the PR [0] things are going to get very interesting. Before you needed to run expensive transcoding jobs to be able to support heterogenous clients. Once we get Simulcast the only cost will be bandwidth. With Hetzner I am paying $1 a TB. With AV1 or H265 + Simulcast I am getting 4K for hundreds of users on just a single server. We will have some growing pains, but I am not giving up unti…

I have found it's hard to get past ~18Gbps on commodity servers and ~90Gbps on high spec, carefully specced servers. I presume you find the same?

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#104
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any video players which can play a webrtc stream? Last I checked, VLC and other popular tools still don’t support it.

I'd guess VLC will get support for it soon now that ffmpeg supports it.

Possibly, but VLC maintains its own codec libraries and doesn't rely on FFMpeg.

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#105
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need --enable-muxer=whip and --enable-openssl

Seems work but fails with 500 when streaming to cloudflare stream though: https://gist.github.com/Leland-Takamine/1a13f31c7521d0223624...

Resolved by adding an audio stream

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any video players which can play a webrtc stream? Last I checked, VLC and other popular tools still don’t support it.

That's impossible, VLC supports everything. If VLC doesn't support it, it doesn't exist.

XAVC HS 4k 10Bit HEVC 4:2:2 on Windows.

Plex and ffmpeg, perfectly fine. VLC is not a fan.

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#107
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes we are :) When OBS merges the PR [0] things are going to get very interesting. Before you needed to run expensive transcoding jobs to be able to support heterogenous clients. Once we get Simulcast the only cost will be bandwidth. With Hetzner I am paying $1 a TB. With AV1 or H265 + Simulcast I am getting 4K for hundreds of users on just a single server. We will have some growing pains, but I am not giving up unti…

I have found it's hard to get past ~18Gbps on commodity servers and ~90Gbps on high spec, carefully specced servers. I presume you find the same?

A twitch 720p stream is only 4 Mbps. 1080p? 6-8 Mbps

So if you've got ~18 Gbps of upload bandwidth you're ready for 10,000-20,000 viewers.

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#108

I am so incredibly excited for WebRTC broadcasting. I wrote up some reasons in the Broadcast Box[0] README and the OBS PR [1] Now that GStreamer, OBS and FFmpeg all have WHIP support we finally have a ubiquitous protocol for video broadcasting for all platforms (Mobile, Web, Embedded, Broadcasting Software etc...) I have been working on Open Source + WebRTC Broadcasting for years now. This is a huge milestone :) [0]…

Any plans to add multipath/failover-bonding support? e.g. mobile streaming unit connected with several 5G modems. Some people use a modified SRT to send H.265 over multiple links.

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any video players which can play a webrtc stream? Last I checked, VLC and other popular tools still don’t support it.

That's impossible, VLC supports everything. If VLC doesn't support it, it doesn't exist.

While that might be true I've found mpv more approachable when doing weird inputs

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#110
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLMs really know how to use it incredibly well. You can ask them to do just about any video related task and they can give you an ffmpeg one liner to do it.

Wow, you are not wrong. I just asked Gemini "how can I use ffmpeg to apply a lower third image to a video?" and it gave a very detailed explanation of using an overlay filter. Have not tested its answer yet but on its face it looks legit.

It's amazing --- I cut my teeth in software engineering with ffmpeg-related work 15 years ago, LLMs generating CLI commands with filters etc. is right up there with "bash scripts" as things LLMs turned from "theoratically possible, but no thanks unless you're paying me" into fun, easy, and regular.

Yesterday I asked it for a command to take a 14 minute video, play the first 10 seconds in realtime, and rest at 10x speed. The ffmpeg CLI syntax always seemed to be able to do anything if you could keep it all in you head, but I was still surprised to see that ffmpeg could do it all in one command.

Post reply on HN