Re:Ask HN: Share your FFmpeg settings for video hosting
by ccvannorman on Wednesday July 24, 2024 @08:02AM
(#41056073)
Seconding this: adding "-pix_fmt yuv420p" to your conversion will ensure compatibility, for example if you try attaching a converted MP4 to a WhatsApp chat, it will not show a preview or play unless you include this flag.
Re:Ask HN: Share your FFmpeg settings for video hosting
by indulona on Wednesday July 24, 2024 @07:50AM
(#41055978)
opus has no issues with support, why go with older aac then?
Re:Ask HN: Share your FFmpeg settings for video hosting
by anotherhue on Wednesday July 24, 2024 @07:59AM
(#41056056)
If you think opus has no issues you must not have tested many devices.
If your subset handles it, great, but don't be dismissive.
Re:Ask HN: Share your FFmpeg settings for video hosting
by indulona on Wednesday July 24, 2024 @10:08AM
(#41057290)
like nokia 3110 from 1998? :D
Re:Ask HN: Share your FFmpeg settings for video hosting
by deicidist on Wednesday July 24, 2024 @01:06PM
(#41059216)
Like Rokus from 2019.
Re:Ask HN: Share your FFmpeg settings for video hosting
by atoav on Wednesday July 24, 2024 @08:48AM
(#41056521)
Many users of youtube/Vimeo are used to supplying their files like that. Most GUI tools won't have Opus. So if you care about your users delivering already encoded files AAC might be the wiser choice.
This depends on your target audience however
AAC is more standard for mp4 video than opus, although I agree opus is the superior CODEC. Whether the benefits of opus outweigh the downsides of it being non-standard in your usecase is not mine to decide, but if you are looking to produce a thing that is similar to most other web video things out there I'd go with AAC. The saved bandwith is probably miniscule in comparison to what you could save on the video side.