Talk:FFmpeg

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the FFmpeg article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1

Software: Computing Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

"How to" section

Maybe there should be a "how to" section to help people create builds of ffmpeg on various platforms, with additional directions to incorporate various external libraries, like zlib, into the build. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.181.199 (talk • contribs) 05:23, 6 January 2006

No, this is Wikipedia, not the FFmpeg program documentation. A link would be fine, though DonDiego 10:09, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming

What does FF stand for? File format? --Scot.hale 17:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Fast Forward", according to Fabrice: http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2006-February/007707.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.22.56.194 (talk • contribs) 23:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Differences between MEncoder and FFmpeg

Is this a place to describe the differences between MEncoder and FFmpeg ( I can't find a comparison anywhere )?--Scot.hale 17:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of any comparison, but mplayer includes some libraries from FFmpeg (libavcodec and libavformat) which contain the entire code-base required to decode/encode videos using ffmpeg. The rest of ffmpeg is a simple encoder and decoder application and some video server tools. So, mencoder problems contains all of the ffmpeg features you care about and also some others through additional libraries. AlyM 08:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Download link does not work

The second link to download the windows exectuable does not allow Internet Explorer to connect. Which is a problem as IE is the default browser for windows clients. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.114.34.194 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 16 November 2006

Merge with libavcodec

Shouldn't the FFmpeg and the libavcodec wikipedia articles be merged into one article?, (I suggest that the libavcodec article be merged into the FFmpeg article as a subsection, plus maybe create another subsection for libavformat). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamester17 (talk • contribs) 14:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, please sign your comments and always add them to the bottom of the article — this is where people will be looking for newer ones. See WP:TALK for more on talk page etiquette. -- intgr 17:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No it shouldn't be merged. They refer to different things apparently - FFmpeg is the project and libavcodec is a part of it. I removed the merge tag. The Ubik 21:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think if the merge with libavcodec will be merged, but I don't think it's a good think. FFmpeg and libavcodec are differents projects, and many others projects use libavcodec. I know, it's an old discution, but there is a link on the libavcodec to speak about it on this page. --- Lolo32 (talk) 13:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, don't merge. Different projects under different (incompatible) licenses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.131.40.166 (talk) 19:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are not different projects. libavcodec is part of the FFmpeg project. The FFmpeg utility is almost only a wrapper around all the other libraries. Vitor 1234 (talk) 16:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps some technical points will help to clarify the matter. FFmpeg refers to a utility, that is, a program the user operates to perform a function/task/operation. Examples of utilities include MSWord, Registry Editor, and so fourth. Libavcodec, by contrast, refers to a codec (or more accuratly, a library of codecs). In simple terms it's like a method, or cypher, which a video or audio playing utility uses to understand (code/decode) the "language" in which the data has been written. So while many laymen may associate libavcodec with FFmpeg in much the same way the general public associates hamburgers with McDonalds, or at one time associated photocopying with Xerox when it was first invented, it would be erroneous to merge these two articles as they refer to two entirely different kinds of things. It would be akin to merging an article about the cola bean, with an article about Coca-Cola soft drink. Katrina 1980 (talk) 12:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Err, sorry but IMHO you are a little confused. FFmpeg is a project that develop some libraries, notably libavcodec and libavformat and some command line utilities (ffmpeg, ffplay and ffserver). The utilities are little more than just wrappers around the libraries, they are the one who do the bulk of the work. A better analogy would be Internet Explorer and the Trident engine. Vitor 1234 (talk) 16:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Legal status references?

For example, [European Union] nations do not recognize software patents and/or have laws
expressly allowing reverse engineering for purposes of interoperability.

European Commission's Council Directive 91/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs (“Programs Directive”) states at Article 6 (among other things):

The authorization of the rightholder shall not be required where reproduction of the code and translation of its form within the meaning of Article 4(a) and (b) are indispensable to obtain the information necessary to achieve the interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, provided that the following conditions are met: (a) these acts are performed by the licensee or by another person having a right to use a copy of a program, or on their behalf by a person authorized to do so; (b) the information necessary to achieve interoperability has not previously been readily available to the persons referred to in subparagraph (a); and (c) these acts are confined to the parts of the original program which are necessary to achieve interoperability

The Recitals of the Program Directive help to interpret and clarify its meaning. They state (among other things):

a person having a right to use a computer program should not be prevented from performing acts necessary to observe, study or test the functioning of the program, provided that these acts do not infringe the copyright of the program; the unauthorised reproduction, translation, adaptation or transformation of the formof the code in which a copy of the computer program has been made available constitutes an infringement of the exclusive rights of the author; nevertheless, circumstances may exist when such a reproduction of the code and translation of its form within the meaning of Article 4(a) and (b) are indispensable to obtain the necessary information to achieve the interoperability of an independently created program with other programs; in these limited circumstances only, performance of the acts of reproduction and translation by or on behalf of a person having a right to use a copy of the program is legitimate and compatible with fair practice and must therefore be deemed not to require the authorisation of the rightholder

well, I added it as a reference; maybe inline link would be better? what other references people need for that section? 91.124.48.228

Fair use rationale for Image:FFmpeg-logo.svg

Image:FFmpeg-logo.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huge table

I think the huge table about FFmpeg's capabilities should not have been added. It was made from ffmpeg's help output, but forgets the important hint there, that decoders and encoders often do not share a name, and thus, the table has to be read with some "interpretation". As long as no agreement about removal is found, I will try to fix the entries. CE --62.178.80.242 (talk) 10:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see the table removed, too. It is way too huge and detailed for the article, does not use correct terms and names and it also confuses formats with codecs.—J. M. (talk) 15:54, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Regression Tester (talk) 15:40, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

all compression codecs are patented? what about vorbis?

The article says, "At least all codecs [used by ffmpeg] that compress information could be claimed by patent holders." Is this true? I thought ffmpeg at least included vorbis, which compresses information and is not covered by any patent. Am I missing something? --Allen (talk) 14:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Vorbis#Licensing. There are so many patents about multimedia compression technology and they are so broad-worded that one can never be sure that a format is not covered by any patent. --Vitor 1234 (talk) 20:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Latest version

The latest version, ffmpeg 0.6 has now added support for Webm and VP8. As per the release notes here. --Xero (talk) 03:56, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

otoh, the latest released version (todays) has fixes for svq3 watermark decoding and dv detection... --Regression Tester (talk) 23:37, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FFmpeg on Ubuntu and OpenSuse

Regarding the two useful sources for the claim that FFmpeg is not distributed by (some) major Linux distributions: Nowadays, Ubuntu contains uncut versions of MPlayer and vlc, both containing complete libavcodec libraries. OpenSuse provides links to the packman repository in its default configuration, packman itself provides complete versions of FFmpeg, MPlayer and vlc, so apart from seeing no "stripped version of FFmpeg" anywhere, I doubt there is any limitation for users (although the distributions claim there is). --Regression Tester (talk) 09:18, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about the Libav fork? It's even not mentioned here...

What about the Libav fork? The decission is unclear, but it seems related to the project management. Something similar to EGCS or it's even deeper? I just want to say: Don't be afraid of forking, it's what makes Free Software technologically and socially better. The most adapted one will survive, this is an organic system :) 87.217.11.95 (talk) 13:56, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]