72 個の投稿 / 0 new
最終投稿
#1 2017-01-12 05:17

Video conversions active

Been a while since an update was posted, I know. But most stuff has been so minor that it didn't need one. Anyway:

As I'm sure most of you have noticed by now, there is now a gear icon in the player that can be used to select video quality. And of course this now means that all uploads are being encoded.
This brings benefits such as higher compatibility, smoother playback, eliminates cases where video and/or audio would not play, and of course in most cases smaller file sizes even for highest resolution - which means faster streaming downloads.

New uploads will all be given 3 resolution options: 360p, 540p, and choosing 720p or 1080p based on original video. As of right now, anything higher than 1080p will be reduced to 1080p. The higher limit may change soon, if we can allow for example 1440p or higher. Encoding settings were chosen to accommodate the needs for 3D video and should result in satisfactory HD and SD quality with reasonable file sizes. No more bloated videos that are a pain to stream.

Along with this change, download buttons are currently broken but should be fixed relatively soon. Until then, if you really must have something then simply right click inside the player and choose save as.

Feel free to leave any comments, concerns, or complaints in here.

2017-01-12 07:58

Will we not be able to DL original videos?

2017-01-12 08:11

Original video will no longer be stored.

2017-01-12 08:42

I think it's the wrong choice that the same as nico. Recently, many video creators left nico for that reason. Most video creators are very sensitive to re-encoding.
I think download button should provide the original video (300MB limits).

2017-01-12 08:54

It's not very practical to do so. It almost doubles storage requirements. Current storage requirements were increased by about 40% by activating resolution options.
I'd have to buy another server just for that. With operation costs already around 800 euro/m and increasing to over 900 once the server we need becomes available, I'd need good reason to invest in the storage. Something like 40 euro/m for a cheap large storage server.
Unfortunately, costs continue to rise as traffic becomes heavier over time.

2017-01-12 09:26

360p for web player, original video (200MB limits) for download. Is it not possible? then I will provide the original video with other storage services like mega.
It is convenient to be able to change the download link from the video edit page.

2017-01-12 10:05

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

2017-01-12 10:14

#1 you are about to kill the only feat this site can compete against many other streaming site :(

2017-01-12 10:25

@admin today you ruined video quality. what's next? censorship? copirights? (눈_눈)

2017-01-12 10:50

how was the video quality ruined exactly?

2017-01-12 12:07
Quote:
exactly?

soap. failed details and more... instead words just do upload-download then compare the bitrate, colors and smoothness

2017-01-12 12:12

*cough* posting non encoded version for downloads from mediafire/mega is an option you know *cough*

previosly broken videos are working now, no buffer delays.

2017-01-12 12:19

#10 : machine conversion tamper all your conversion preset . since conversion is never make quality better. it's always almost perfect at best result compared to the originals [which is always rare case].

#1 : i'm aware that the server burdened with bad compression resulting people can't stream properly. i also understand the solutions you presented are backed with solid arguments.
the things is not all video in this site having difficulty to stream. only videos not followed this thread http://ecchi.iwara.tv/forums/english-basic-guide-preparing-videos-upload having difficulty to streams which responsibility held solely by each uploaders.

if i may give a suggestion , why not :
> enforce the bitrate rules [vimeo done this] in ratio with duration or file size.
> you can add rules of weekly upload quota. so content makers change approach from quantity to quality.
> only re encode videos not followed the bitrate guide linked above.
> only embedded video allowed to have private videos properties.
> use only 1 low resolution [360 or 480] preview just like the old site way.
> lower the file size limit.

i don't know if all the suggestion i presented above covers the site burden.
also #7 suggest a nice links https://zencoder.com/en/ for people having difficulty with compressing their works [there's should be many alternatives for this site]

i sincerely wish you reconsider the decision of removing the original uploads

~旦_(^O^ ) cheers

2017-01-12 12:40
Quote:
posting non encoded version for downloads from

any reason for this site, then? beside explicit content ofc
by the way i can put dl link at my blog or something else like "any"ch board and it would be better than peoples can say "ah! this video are pos!" because bad encode

2017-01-12 13:02
Quote:
soap. failed details and more... instead words just do upload-download then compare the bitrate, colors and smoothness

well, if you can pinpoint and show exactly whats wrong, nothing can be done about it.
If there are issues with encoding, including visual changes, I'm pretty sure they can be fixed. But for that, concrete examples will be needed.

This whole thing is not about lowering quality, but compatibility.
Vast majority videos ever uploaded are encoded poorly, usually containing duplicate data which does nothing but enlarge the file. Also there is significant amount of videos containing encoding errors.

2017-01-12 13:14
Quote:
Also there is significant amount of videos containing encoding errors.

we have english-basic-guide-preparing-videos-upload to avoid this. and i say it one and one more time, we need post-moderation like uploads inspection&checkup (include video-image size-content-duration-bitrate, text and tags)

2017-01-12 13:11

Now some of the phenomenon of screen error。Still want to have the original quality Download

2017-01-12 13:15

Some of the screen is converted to 1080P after the original download even bigger.This is very bad.

2017-01-12 14:10

Guide is nice, sure. but if its not followed or there is issue with encoding software, it wont matter.
for post-moderation, you can start new topic and going into detail.

2017-01-12 14:49

@Tomma see http://ecchi.iwara.tv/images/iwara-re-encoding-comparison
it's a slight difference, but there are differences.

2017-01-12 14:53

thanks, I will have a look into fixing it.
please do not delete this image or video until its fixed

2017-01-12 15:00
Tomaa wrote:
start new topic and going into detail

already did it on troll, so what?

p.s. sorry for offtop

2017-01-12 15:03

by the way, I cannot edit the image page. It seems that DB does not sync.
>The content on this page has either been modified by another user, or you have already submitted modifications using this form. As a result, your changes cannot be saved.

2017-01-12 15:12

#15 : This whole thing is not about lowering quality, but compatibility.
Vast majority videos ever uploaded are encoded poorly, usually containing duplicate data which does nothing but enlarge the file. Also there is significant amount of videos containing encoding errors.

Vast majority <-- not quite right. only a few videos have troubles
the terms of re-encode will never make original video better no matter the purposes are for. if people want fast stream , just make re encode with 1 lower dpi for preview. do not touch the originals, rather contact the content creator , give them choices either let themselves fix their own products to fit the new standards. or let the server re-encode their original files. give it a week to fix and decide. also put it on site rules.

conversion server using CBR instead of 2 pass VBR is . is fine just for low res preview. no sane encoders using CBR instead of VBR and expecting to preserve good ratio between quality and file size.

collateral damage does matter. nobody wants their room burned just because some next door tenants juggling with stove in their own room. :(

2017-01-12 18:09

Saving bandwidth and keeping videos streamable is a valid concern, especially with people using the full 300 MB limit for 10 second sex loops.

The chosen bitrate settings seem reasonable as far as i checked, however as Xnqn suggested, it should be possible to keep the original encoding, if the uploader adheres to officially defined limits. The server should check the total file size, as it was done before, but also check the average bitrate. If the file adheres to the defined limits, the original file should be kept as the highest resolution version, if it doesn't adhere, it should be re-encoded.

Some Background:
Experienced creators use 2-pass encoding, which keeps a constant video quality instead of constant bitrate, while still adhering to a maximum average bitrate. This means the video looks a lot better, while using the same space on the server. In fact it might use LESS space on the server, as I observed with my "CA Nurse Musclecar" video, which used to be 114 MB big and is now, after re-encoding to a worse quality, 123 MB big.

Anyway, I hope you still have all the original files, so you can re-encode them, because the server's encoder introduces a 2 frame delay, which makes all videos I checked so far look off-sync. This is a much more important issue to fix than video quality, because it's really noticeable in music videos, which happen to still be the majority of videos on this site.

2017-01-12 18:26

If you can share your settings, I will give it a try.
Original files were not deleted.

2017-01-12 19:02
Xnqn wrote:
>enforce the bitrate rules [vimeo done this] in ratio with duration or file size.
> you can add rules of weekly upload quota. so content makers change approach from quantity to quality.

if its enforced people will complain the same way you guys are complaining now.
some people still dont upload to this webside to this day because of the 300mb limit.

guruguruguro wrote:
any reason for this site, then? beside explicit content ofc

oh i dont know... picture galleries, mmd resource archives, oh! how about a community that assists you in your video making or asset gathering? no? still not enough? i guess a streaming site that doesnt delete any videos has no merit...

i see the main point of most of the complaints is quality loss. first post says quality will get higher later. chill your beans.

2017-01-12 22:25

@Tomaa: Are you a new admin? I'm just asking, because the forum and profile don't display any info.
It seems the sync problem is related to some specific encoding setting, used in my old videos. So unless it happens for more users, you can probably disregard that issue, since replacing the old files with new encodes, using my current settings, should fix it.
Which settings should I share? The ones for the problematic videos, or for VBR 2-pass encoding in general? I can provide some ffmpeg command lines with the proper settings for 2-pass encoding, if you want.
The videos where the sync problem occurs are pretty old though, so I'm not sure what settings I used. Back then I might have used Handbrake to encode them, which by default has variable frame rate enabled, which might be causing the problem. The videos themselves have a constant frame rate though.

@Guthix: Just disregard the drama, but what Xnqn asks for actually makes sense, for both, better video quality and lower bandwidth. What he means is to have a specific max bitrate and file size, under which the server accepts videos without re-encoding them. If a video doesn't adhere to that, the server should still accept the file, but re-encode it to sane specifications, like it's currently done. It wouldn't enforce anything, but just choose the appropriate handling depending on the file's specifications. If people are able to read the rules, their videos will simply look better. VBR 2-pass encoding is objectively superior to CBR encoding. In videos that have scenes with a lot of motion, it can look as if the bitrate is 2 or 4 times as high, although the average bitrate is kept the same as in the CBR encoding. As I said earlier, my CA video's original file was smaller than the re-encode that's supposed to save bandwidth, and looked better.

2017-01-12 23:18

#27 : the differences between re-encoding and enforce the bitrate rules [for streaming compatibility] aside from quality with the same file size is creator consent and additional server burden from re-encoding tasks. sorry i can't explains in more convincing way but here we go :

re-encoding will always watered down quality to achieve streaming compatibility, adding task to conversion server to replicate the original resolution and prevent creators to learn proper encoding [since no matter what they uploaded it will always re-encoded anyway]

bitrate rules will make creators encoding their works according to the guides so the video uploaded will be fit below new standard max file size. keeping original files & quality accepted by creators within new standard max file size will eliminate 1 tasks for conversion server to replicate the original resolution while preventing quality loss.

re-compress videos to achieve better quality , lower file size and streaming compatibility is easy task on each feat, but sadly doing all of those feat in a single media will never be possible.

i suggest weekly upload quota to prevent "the banned person" case and to force creators do their best. quality over quantity,
less video but more views equal to same streaming activity, same server benefit from ads while keeping less storage usage.

we can also aware that private videos always have less view than the regular ones. use premium services for that feat is actually good for both side.

~旦_(^O^ ) cheers

2017-01-12 23:40

@Takuya
I'm not new, I just didnt needed web access until now.
I mean VBR 2-pass you use. ffmpeg cli will be fine.
Not sure about sync problem. Best would be probably to get this finalized and then we can test try reencoding one of those.

@may555
check the video now, just remember to change to 720p. its not final yet, but looks much better to me.

2017-01-13 00:50
Takuya wrote:
What he means is to have a specific max bitrate and file size

implying you can write a script, that can detect those and weather the video is broken or not.
im not saying its a bad idea, but im uncertain this is possible with the current website progress [ i mean how long did it take to fix videos after conversion from TV]
also not everyone who posts videos uses the forums [or atleast all of the forums].

Xnqn wrote:
sorry i can't explains in more convincing way but here we go

you dont need to convince me of anything. while all of this sounds fine and dandy on paper, in practice it wont work.
some poeple dont bother using the guides, even if the video is not viewable. not to mention there will be new users, which will require constant rule enforcement.
even if the uploader doesnt think that the problem lies in the website, but in his own encoding, not everyone knows where to look, or doesnt want to spend the time looking for a solution in the forums. People are lazy, so this is why automation comes in play.[im not even talking about making new threads asking questions that were answered somehwere else in the forums]

the quota and quality over quantity idea is a train wreck. a quota is not a flexible solution, and it wont nessasery make users spend more time on the video. it will also have inconvieniences, like for example if a user with a large collection of high quality videos is invited to the website, he has to wait a week per video to upload everything. Not everyone has a high end toaster to load the latest shaders, not everyone is congnitive enough to listen that a model shouldnt dance in the midle of a wall [or another model]. in the end it will just make everyone wait for slower spam.

ページ