Re: WME -- Is This Possible???
- From: "Neil Smith [MVP Digital Media]" <neil@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 11:56:30 +0100
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 22:21:01 -0700, Postproduction
<Postproduction@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Neil,
You seem to be "The Man" around here -- so, if you don't mind, I'm directing
this to you.
We are a film and video postproduction facility that occasionally needs to
work with clients that are either across town -- or across the country.
In the best of all worlds, we'd like to provide our clients with a realtime
stream out of our Avid non-linear editing platforms -- so they can review and
approve work remotely.
We understand that goal may not be entirely unrealistic -- but it's worth
laying that groundwork so you understand where we are coming from.
After much research, we've come up with our wish list:
We need an encoder solution that can also host/serve streams to a limited
number of viewers -- without a standalone hardware or software media server
platform involved.
We need an encoder/streaming solution that will allow our clients to
subscribe ("pull") the stream by simply entering an "IP:Port" address into a
standard browser or media player.
We need an encoder/streaming solution with absolute minimum latency
(encoding, publishing and player) -- so that clients are viewing media in as
close to realtime as possible.
We'd like an encoding/streaming solution that allows some level of security
or DRM -- to prevent eavesdropping -- although limiting the number of streams
might suffice in a pinch.
We'd never have more than five individuals viewing the stream (more likely
one or two) -- and we have a dedicated 10Mb/s business-class unlimited upload
connection.
Our Avids output a host of video signal types -- but our preference would be
to feed an "encoding/server solution" with the professional HD-SDI signals
from our hardware.
We work in both Standard Definition and High Definition -- and we understand
the bandwidth requirements and challenges of transmitting HD.
If necessary, we could always downconvert the HD to SD in realtime out of
our Avids -- and go that route to save bandwidth.
We have researched the big players in our business like Digital Rapids and
Streambox -- but we don't have the budget for those high-end dedicated
"appliances".
Also, those devices are typically used for television and cable station
"back-haul" -- and, therefore, require all sorts of network configuration at
the receiving end in order to receive the stream.
Our clients are not technical enough to configure routers, switches,
firewalls and port forwarding -- and their IT staff is understandably not
interested in making the necessary changes.
We have also looked at the middle-tier companies like ViewCast, Optibase,
VBrick, and Vcast (there may be other contenders -- but this is all I know).
While there are some interesting lower-cost dedicated "appliances" from
those companies -- they are still not cheap either.
Furthermore, those devices typically don't support HD-SDI inputs or high
definition video -- although a small, dedicated, portable, purpose-built
appliance is very attractive.
While talking to ViewCast, we learned about their Osprey 700e HD Capture
Card: http://www.viewcast.com/products/osprey-700e-hd
They told us it worked well with Windows Media Encoder and it features an
HD-SDI input.
We started researching Window Media Encoder and began to wonder if this
could really be a solution.
And, that's how we got here.
May I ask a couple of questions:
1. Is there anything that we have outlined that you think is worth
commenting on?
I think the idea of applying rights management is achievable. However
it introduces both latency (time to acquire license), end user
complexity (individualisation step may fail or require technical
support) and service provision on a separate windows server 2003 box.
If you have time to trawl through this section you can see why :
http://licenseserver.windowsmedia.com/DRMCA_FAQ.asp
Possibly partnering with a license-server provider is one way, as WME
live content can have DRM applied - though I'm well known for my
reistance to DRM usage for end-users on these newsgroups.
2. Are we nuts to think that WME can accomplish some or all of our goals?
Not necessarily. From small acorns, great trees grow ;-)
The WME9 series encoder matches your requirements for live encoding
using a simple URL scheme [ip_address]:{port}
This can be made easier for end users by putting an ASX file
(playlist) onto a web server which contains these values, and having
the user click on the link to the ASX file.
The ASX content can reasonably be generated dynamically (ASP.NET, PHP,
JSP, Perl etc) as it's just a text file, and the script to generate
that can be integrated into any web content management system that
allows for password protected access.
You may for example store the encoder IP address and port chosen, in a
database for easier updating than FTPing the ASX file to a web server.
3. If it is possible to use WME, would you suggest using any other card
besides the Osprey 700e HD?
I don't have any specific hardware recommendations - it looks like the
suggested device spec meets your requirements.
3. Can you quantify the impact of the computing platform on WME's
performance:
a) Would a 64bit OS (Vista64 Business) perform superior to a 32bit OS (XP
Pro32)
The OS platform isn't a great influence for me, though I've had good
results using Windows 7 (RTM available October) compared to Vista and
it's been very stable with slightly lower resource usage for the OS.
b) Can we get away with an older 3.0GHZ Dual Xeon machine -- or do we need
to be thinking about a new single or dual quad core workstation?
Windows media encoder can take advantage of up to 4 cores. It's
generally recommended that the 32-bit encoder is adequate as 64-bit
requires 64-bit hardware drivers, codecs and other components which
may be harder to source - see
http://citizeninsomniac.com/blog/wmv9-vc1-faq/
Ben Waggoner (MS's cheif compressionist) has an article you must read:
http://on10.net/blogs/benwagg/Best-practices-for-Windows-Media-Encoder-in-2009/
as it will answer basically all your questions re hardware and OS.
MS are heading down the Silverlight / Expression media encoder route
(I think EME3 is due out) but I don't *think* it has the simple
connection support you're after compared to WME.
c) Is there an optimum amount of RAM for this application -- can we get
away with 2-4GB (XP) or do we need to be thinking about 6-12GB (Vista64)?
Video encoding is almost entirely CPU bound, and has little dependence
on the RAM installed once the needs of the OS are taken care of. WME32
can use up to 4 cores to process the encode.
Ben's article mentions the Tarari encoder add-in accelerator, which
comes in around $5-6000. An array of commodity PCs would be a less
capital expensive route.
4. Are we completely out of our minds -- and do we just have to save up for
an enterprise class solution by one of the big players?
I guess it depends how much of this is nice to have, and how much this
feature is a core business requirement (usually the business group
holds the purse strings).
Bear in mind that as you're looking at a CPU bound system, and
encoding HD live is *hard*, you'll probably need 1 encoder box per
customer connected.
You can run multiple instances of WME on a PC with different port
numbers/same IP address, but the CPU or motherboard's data path may
not have enough resources to encode multiple SD or HD videos at once,
where many audio encodes would be reasonable
HTH - Cheers, Neil
------------------------------------------------
Digital Media MVP : 2004-2009
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/mvpfaqs
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: WME -- Is This Possible???
- From: Postproduction
- Re: WME -- Is This Possible???
- References:
- WME -- Is This Possible???
- From: Postproduction
- WME -- Is This Possible???
- Prev by Date: Re: Live Stream with Content instead of Video
- Next by Date: Re: WME -- Is This Possible???
- Previous by thread: WME -- Is This Possible???
- Next by thread: Re: WME -- Is This Possible???
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
