video watermarking without vhooks?
 

OK, I'm looking to watermark some flvs during transcoding and have found out that the regular ffmpeg way using -vhook is no longer supported (since 0.5) in favour of libavfilter. However, afaik none of the ffmpeg developers have yet been able to bring watermarking using libavfilter to the ffmpeg board, even after this being a major request in ggogle's summer of code.

So... reverting to ffmpeg 0.5 not being an option due to the all the up-to-date x.264 libraries not being backward compatible, what are the other OSS options for watermarking videos?

If ffmpeg without vhooks can do this, please shoot me down in a blaze of unglory...

current ffmpeg config:

If you own the content, you should be watermarking during the editing process. Makes life a million times easier.

And if you don't own the content... why are you watermarking it?

sucks vhooks doesnt work in the latest svn release

you're a fucking idiot :2 cents:

#1 I own the content, or at least the person I am doing this for does.
#2 We only want some of the content watermarked, not all
#3 Maybe we purchased the content, not created it, so there is no "editing process"

It's better to keep your gob closed and be thought of as an idiot than to open it and remove all doubt.

yeah, and the ffmpeg developers say it's removed in favour of libavfilter as that's superior, but as yet there's still no support for videomarking in libavfilter :mad:

I really can't retrograde, cos otherwise I'd have to retrograde all the libraries. I've tried creating a static binary of 0.5 just for the vhooks but it keeps saying there's a problem with libxvid for some reason.

Anyone have a static ffmpeg binary for centos supporting vhooks they could email me?

He was just asking a question. What the fucks wrong with you?!?

I was going to ask just that :upsidedow

Ill just leave this one alone lol

Listen fucker, I film content and edit videos for a living. The question was asked so I could give you an answer that would make sense for your situation.

But since you want to be an aggressive asshole about it, I think my best suggestion would be to tell you to go fuck yourself.

Since when does purchased content mean it's pre-edited? I've only ever bought and sold raw unedited content. And most content transactions from photographers to media companies are done with raw unedited content. In most cases that would include an editing process.

Well Mr. Smarty pants, I doubt based on not only this reply but your first, you wouldn't be able to give him any answer that would make sense for his situation, other then "blah blah blah, you should be watermarking on encoding, blah blah blah, did you steal the videos, blah blah blah, pay me, blah blah blah" and be totally unrelated to anything he's talking about.

You're a content guy, he's a programmer, you'll have NO idea what he's talking about or how to answer his question, so it's probably best you drop it and move on.

Snoochies.

i would try going on irc.freenode.net #ffmpeg they might be able to recommend something

listen, the only question you asked was why I was watermarking videos if it was stolen content. So, you were insinuating the content was stolen in my eyes, because I would never dream of mentioning stolen content to someone who asks a technical question about encoding. I guess different people think differently that's all.

Purchased doesn't mean pre-edited, but then I was trying to understand what you were going on about with your "advice". Since when does content *have* to be always watermarked? Your advise is watermark everything from the outset, yet you have no idea wtf I'm trying to do.

fwiw, client only wants watermarking the content that is used for promotion by affiliates, so they can't use the content for promoting others. I've coded it so affiliates can overlay their own watermark to pass the content off as theirs if they want, but the click always goes to us. Members get watermark-free content as that is how it works around here, leached and uploaded to tubes or not.

So screw you if you take offence to me riling up against your pathetic post because your post did not in any way shape or form address my question and yet expended as much space suggesting stolen content as it did offering "advice".

deadlines man, deadlines :Oh crap