Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (3648)

• Working way to make video from images in C#

  29 août 2011, par Jim Mischel

  Does anybody have a known reliable way to create a video from a series of image files ? Before you mod me down for not searching for the answer before posting the question, and before you fire off a simple message like "use FFMPEG," read the rest of this message.

  I'm trying to create a video, it doesn't matter too much what format as long as it's widely supported, from a series of images (.jpg, .bmp, etc.). My platform is Windows Server 2008, 64-bit. If I can make the video from within my C# program, that's great, but I'm not averse to writing a series of image files to a directory and then firing off an external program to make a video from those images.

  The only constraints are : it must work on my Windows Server 2008 system, and be scriptable. That is, no GUI programs that require operator intervention.

  I found a number of similar questions on StackOverflow, and have tried several of the solutions, all with varying degrees of frustration and none with anything like success.

  FFMPEG looks like a great program. Maybe it is, on Linux. The two Windows builds I downloaded are broken. Given this command line :

    ffmpeg -r 1 -f image2 -i jpeg\*.jpg video.avi

  One of the builds reads the images and then crashes due to data execution prevention. The other reads the first file and then spits out an error message that says "cannot find suitable codec for file jpeg/image2.jpg". Helpful, that. In any case, FFMPEG looks like a non-starter under Windows.

  One answer to a previous posting recommended Splicer . It looks like pretty good code. I compiled the samples and tried to run, but got some cryptic error message about a file not found. It looks like a COM class isn't registered. I suppose I need to install something (DirectShow, maybe, although I thought that was already installed ?). Depending on what's required, I might have a difficult time justifying its installation on a server. ("What ? Why do you need that on a server ?")

  Another answer suggested the AviFile library from Code Project. That looks simple enough : a wrapper around the Windows AviFile subsystem. Except that the AVI files the package creates appear to have all of the frames, but only the first frame shows when I play the AVI in Windows Media Player. Well, that and if you try to create a compressed video, the program throws an exception.

  So, I'm left wondering if there is a good, reliable way to do what I want : on a Windows system, create an AVI or other common video file format from a series of images, either through a .NET API or using an external program. Any help ?

• Back on the Salty Track

  12 juin 2011, par Multimedia Mike — General

  After I posted about my initial encounter and frustration with Google’s Native Client (NaCl) SDK and took a deep breath, I realized that I achieved an important proof of concept— I successfully played music using the NaCl SDK audio output interface. Then I started taking a closer read through the (C-based set of) header files and realized I might be able to make a go of it after all. I had much better luck this time and managed to create a proper Native Client interface that allows for controlling playback, presenting metadata, and toggling individual voices (a fascinating tool for studying classic game music).

  I haven’t bothered to post the actual plugin because, really, what’s the point ? I started with NaCl SDK 0.3 which requires Chrome 12, which means terribly limited reach, even among Chrome users. At least, that was true when I restarted this little project. Chrome 12 was formally released this past week. Chrome development really does move at breakneck pace.

  Anyway, here is a static screenshot of what the plugin currently looks like :

  
  
  

  Not pretty, but it does the job.

  Dev Journal
  Various notes based on this outing :

  • Portability : I tested my plugin using Chrome 12 on 64-bit Windows, Mac, and Linux. Mac and Linux both work ; Windows does not.
  • Build System : SDK 0.3 is still lacking in its ability to compile .cpp files (instead of .cc files) ; necessary because libgme is C++ using .cpp files. This requires some build system modification.
  • Getting the interfaces : This is where I got tripped up the first time around. get_browser_interface() from their example actually refers to a parameter passed in through the PPP_InitializeModule() function. The SDK’s template generator renames this to get_browser().
  • Debugging : I feel unstoppable once I have a printf() mechanism available to me during development. To that end, console.log() from JavaScript outputs to Chrome’s built-in JavaScript console log while putting printf() statements in the actual NaCl plugin causes the messages to show up in /.xsession-errors on Linux/X.
  • Size Matters : The binaries generated with the NaCl 0.3 SDK are ridiculously huge. The basic "Hello World" example in C compiles to binaries that are 6.7 MB and 7.8 MB for the 32- and 64-bit builds, respectively. This made me apprehensive to build a full version of SaltyGME that contains all the bells and whistles offered by the library. However, all of the GME code compiled into the binary adds very little size. Curiously, the C++ version of "Hello World" only ranges from 1.8-2.0 MB for 32- and 64-bit. Is there some kind of C tax happening here ? Note that running ’strip’ on the resulting .nexe files (they’re ELF files, after all) brings the sizes down into the C++ range, but at the cost of causing them to not work (more specifically, not even load).
  • No Messaging : The NaCl SDK is supposed to have a messaging interface which allows the NaCl plugin to send asynchronous messages up to the hosting page. When I try to instantiate it, I get a NULL. I’m stuck with the alternative of polling from the JavaScript side to, e.g., determine when a song has finished loading via the network.

  That’s all I can think of for now. I may work on this a little more (I’d like to at least see some audio visualization). Maybe Google will enable NaCl per default sometime around Chrome 21 and this program will be ready for prime time by then.

  See Also :

  • My first attempt at this same project

• Programming Language Levels

  20 mai 2011, par Multimedia Mike — Programming

  I’ve been doing this programming thing for some 20 years now. Things sure do change. One change I ponder from time to time is the matter of programming language levels. Allow me to explain.

  The 1990s
  When I first took computer classes in the early 1990s, my texts would classify computer languages into 3 categories, or levels. The lower the level, the closer to the hardware ; the higher the level, the more abstract (and presumably, easier to use). I recall that the levels went something like this :

  • High level : Pascal, BASIC, Logo, Fortran
  • Medium level : C, Forth
  • Low level : Assembly language

  Keep in mind that these were the same texts which took the time to explain the history of computers from mainframes -> minicomputers -> a relatively recent phenomenon called microcomputers or "PCs".

  Somewhere in the mid-late 1990s, when I was at university, I was introduced to a new tier :

  • Very high level : Perl, shell scripting

  I think there was some debate among my peers about whether C++ and Java were properly classified as high or very high level. The distinction between high and very high, in my observation, seemed to be that very high level languages had more complex data structures (at the very least, a hash / dictionary / associative array / key-value map) built into the language, as well as implicit memory management.

  Modern Day
  These days, the old hierarchy is apparently forgotten (much like minicomputers). I observe that there is generally a much simpler 2-tier classification :

  • Low level : C, assembly language
  • High level : absolutely every other programming language in wide use today

  I find myself wondering where C++ and Objective-C fit in this classification scheme. Then I remember that it doesn’t matter and this is all academic.

  Relevancy
  I think about this because I have pretty much stuck to low-level programming all of my life, mostly due to my interest in game and multimedia-type programming. But the trends in computing have favored many higher level languages and programming paradigms. I woke up one day and realized that the kind of work I often do — lower level stuff — is not very common.

  I’m not here to argue that low or high level is superior. You know I’m all about using the appropriate tool for the job. But I sometimes find myself caught between worlds, having the defend and explain one to the other.

  • On one hand, it’s not unusual for the multitudes of programmers working at the high level to gasp and wonder why I or anyone else would ever use C or assembly language for anything when there are so many beautiful high level languages. I patiently explain that those languages have to be written in some other language (at first) and that they need to run on some operating system and that most assuredly won’t be written in a high level language. For further reading, I refer them to Joel Spolsky’s great essay called Back to Basics which describes why it can be useful to know at least a little bit about how the computer does what it does at the lowest levels.
  • On the other hand, believe it or not, I sometimes have to defend the merits of high level languages to my low level brethren. I’ll often hear variations of, "Any program can be written in C. Using a high level language to achieve the same will create a slow and bloated solution." I try to explain that the trade-off in time to complete the programming task weighed against the often-negligible performance hit of what is often an I/O-bound operation in the first place makes it worthwhile to use the high level language for a wide variety of tasks.

    Or I just ignore them. That’s actually the best strategy.