h.264 Codec at DVinfo.net

Ryan Farnes · July 31st, 2008, 06:20 AM

I read through this thread from more than a year ago: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=85764

...but couldn't make heads or tails on h.264

Just wanted to ask about the possibility of submitting .mov films encoded using the h.264 codec instead of the listed options of sorenson3, mpeg-1, mpeg-4

I'm curious whether the h.264 codec is allowed or what current thought is on the matter?

Meryem Ersoz · July 31st, 2008, 11:41 AM

the current thought is that we're thinking about it...

the issue is that we are trying to use universal codecs that do not require mac users to download software to view PC-favorable codecs and vice versa...people hate being forced to download things. so we have avoided it to date.

but h.264 is growing ubiquitous enough now that we are considering including it for next year (when we do our major re-think about how to improve UWOL)...but for right now, no.

we're always open to hearing discussion and debate, but we only try to make major changes once a year, so that things remain as consistent and reliable as possible.

Ryan Farnes · July 31st, 2008, 12:48 PM

Ok. I'm fairy familiar with the world of codecs and as far as I know, h.264 is basically in the same boat as something like Sorenson 3...you get it with most editing software...?

And to view it, it comes with a free quicktime download you'd have to make anyways to view the sorenson 3 or other encoded .mov files. So good to hear its being considered.

I do have to compliment the UWOL challenge on making everyone upload all their videos to the UWOL site. Having all submitted films archived with no broken links is really nice.

Meryem Ersoz · July 31st, 2008, 01:13 PM

i know that the download is free, just as the .wmv player is free for mac users to download, the point is that people seem to hate being forced into downloading apps onto their machines. like i said, now that adobe has adopted an h.264 standard for flash, we may see more broader acceptance of it, and that is what is prompting us to consider it in the future (which is why h.264 is the *only* new codec currently under consideration, sorry .wmv lovers...)

Kevin Railsback · July 31st, 2008, 02:46 PM

That was one of the things I always liked about UWOL is that there is basically a library of films from the last nine challenges so you can see how filmmakers from around the world tackled the same subject.
I think it's also nice to see how filmmakers have grown in their craft from the first challenge they've entered.
I think the UWOL community is a very rare one. We're more of a family and encourage each other instead of trying to beat the competition. It's one of the few places I've found where egos don't get in the way.

Dale Guthormsen · July 31st, 2008, 09:00 PM

kevin,

Here Here!!! I am on the same wave lenght/page!!!!

If we ever have a gathering we should have a session, best practices for compressing for uwol!!!!

July 31st, 2008, 06:20 AM	#1
Ryan Farnes Major Player Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Maryland, USA Posts: 220	h.264 Codec I read through this thread from more than a year ago: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=85764 ...but couldn't make heads or tails on h.264 Just wanted to ask about the possibility of submitting .mov films encoded using the h.264 codec instead of the listed options of sorenson3, mpeg-1, mpeg-4 I'm curious whether the h.264 codec is allowed or what current thought is on the matter?

July 31st, 2008, 02:46 PM	#5
Kevin Railsback Trustee Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa Posts: 1,544	That was one of the things I always liked about UWOL is that there is basically a library of films from the last nine challenges so you can see how filmmakers from around the world tackled the same subject. I think it's also nice to see how filmmakers have grown in their craft from the first challenge they've entered. I think the UWOL community is a very rare one. We're more of a family and encourage each other instead of trying to beat the competition. It's one of the few places I've found where egos don't get in the way. __________________ --==Kevin==-- http:naturephotostudios.com.com

July 31st, 2008, 09:00 PM	#6
Dale Guthormsen Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Saskatchewan Posts: 3,048	kevin, Here Here!!! I am on the same wave lenght/page!!!! If we ever have a gathering we should have a session, best practices for compressing for uwol!!!! __________________ DATS ALL FOLKS Dale W. Guthormsen

July 31st, 2008, 11:41 AM	#2
Meryem Ersoz Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Boulder, CO Posts: 3,015	the current thought is that we're thinking about it... the issue is that we are trying to use universal codecs that do not require mac users to download software to view PC-favorable codecs and vice versa...people hate being forced to download things. so we have avoided it to date. but h.264 is growing ubiquitous enough now that we are considering including it for next year (when we do our major re-think about how to improve UWOL)...but for right now, no. we're always open to hearing discussion and debate, but we only try to make major changes once a year, so that things remain as consistent and reliable as possible.

July 31st, 2008, 12:48 PM	#3
Ryan Farnes Major Player Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Maryland, USA Posts: 220	Ok. I'm fairy familiar with the world of codecs and as far as I know, h.264 is basically in the same boat as something like Sorenson 3...you get it with most editing software...? And to view it, it comes with a free quicktime download you'd have to make anyways to view the sorenson 3 or other encoded .mov files. So good to hear its being considered. I do have to compliment the UWOL challenge on making everyone upload all their videos to the UWOL site. Having all submitted films archived with no broken links is really nice.

July 31st, 2008, 01:13 PM	#4
Meryem Ersoz Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Boulder, CO Posts: 3,015	i know that the download is free, just as the .wmv player is free for mac users to download, the point is that people seem to hate being forced into downloading apps onto their machines. like i said, now that adobe has adopted an h.264 standard for flash, we may see more broader acceptance of it, and that is what is prompting us to consider it in the future (which is why h.264 is the only new codec currently under consideration, sorry .wmv lovers...)