If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(GigaOM)   To add buffering messages on every device in every bitrate regardless of codecs, Netflix must encode each movie 120 times   (gigaom.com) divider line 35
    More: Interesting, Netflix, viewable image size, codec, production house, bitrate, job fair  
•       •       •

2822 clicks; posted to Geek » on 20 Dec 2012 at 2:11 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



35 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-12-20 02:20:06 PM  
If you're seeing "buffering" messages a lot, subby, your ISP must really suck. The reason there are 120 different encodings is because there are multiple bitrates for each codec, including whatever bitrate streams perfectly at the
That, or you're choking your bandwidth with other activity on your local network. You can use QOS settings on your router to prioritize your Netflix-capable devices if you need to.
 
2012-12-20 02:21:11 PM  

jonny_q: If you're seeing "buffering" messages a lot, subby, your ISP must really suck. The reason there are 120 different encodings is because there are multiple bitrates for each codec, including whatever bitrate streams perfectly at the < 1Mpbs I sometimes get at home on a bad night or on my phone's 3G service.

That, or you're choking your bandwidth with other activity on your local network. You can use QOS settings on your router to prioritize your Netflix-capable devices if you need to.


FTFM HTML...
 
2012-12-20 02:21:16 PM  
Well, with so much work to do per title, it's a good thing they start with quality, in-demand titles like Mansquito, and The Day the Planet Stood Still.
 
2012-12-20 02:27:02 PM  
I can never get over how long it took Netflix to provide closed captioning services for their streaming selections. I'm glad they're finally on top of that, but others, like Vudu and Amazon Instant, are still lagging way, WAY behind.

If you're gonna start this kind of business, you have to think ahead and incorporate and future-proof features that should be, or will be, legally required, instead of continuously revamping and updating everything due to short-sighted programmers. By 2013, closed captioning for online video services will be legally required, as should be the case.
 
2012-12-20 02:29:49 PM  
FTA:

Netflix streams to a lot of different devices. More than 900, to be precise.

That's not precise at all.
 
2012-12-20 02:35:38 PM  

The Banana Thug: I can never get over how long it took Netflix to provide closed captioning services for their streaming selections. I'm glad they're finally on top of that, but others, like Vudu and Amazon Instant, are still lagging way, WAY behind.

If you're gonna start this kind of business, you have to think ahead and incorporate and future-proof features that should be, or will be, legally required, instead of continuously revamping and updating everything due to short-sighted programmers. By 2013, closed captioning for online video services will be legally required, as should be the case.


How much would that cost? It's only appeasing roughly 4% of the population.
 
2012-12-20 02:36:25 PM  
www.krisconstable.com
 
2012-12-20 02:37:57 PM  
NashMcNash: That's not precise at all.

What level of precision do you want?
 
2012-12-20 02:42:55 PM  
I regularly use Netflix on two WD TVLive boxes, a Wii, and a laptop... the only time I've ever had buffering problems was when my old router was overloaded with torrent connections, and my QoS wasn't working properly (stopping torrents fixed that, then replaced router with SMB-quality device fixed it permanently), and it's defaulted to Highest streaming quality setting... and I only have a 6MB DSL connection, so Subby's connection must really suck

Starting to read the headline, I thought it was about Real Networks or something...
 
2012-12-20 02:43:40 PM  
More than 900, to be precise.
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-12-20 02:46:43 PM  

The Banana Thug: as should be the case


No it shouldn't
 
2012-12-20 02:47:32 PM  

SirTanon: [www.krisconstable.com image 480x385]

 
I fell for it.  Not proud.
 

meddleRPI: Well, with so much work to do per title, it's a good thing they start with quality, in-demand titles like Mansquito, and The Day the Planet Stood Still.

 
They did just add It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, in their defense.
 
2012-12-20 03:00:30 PM  
Couldn't they just use scalable video coding instead?
 
2012-12-20 03:07:43 PM  

SirTanon: [www.krisconstable.com image 480x385]


Can I borrow steal that?
 
2012-12-20 03:09:01 PM  
What? 120 different sizes?

1024 kbps
1025 kbps
1026 kbps
etc.

Why not just do 5 different sizes, depending on the quality of the connection?
 
2012-12-20 03:18:53 PM  

The Banana Thug: I can never get over how long it took Netflix to provide closed captioning services for their streaming selections. I'm glad they're finally on top of that, but others, like Vudu and Amazon Instant, are still lagging way, WAY behind.

If you're gonna start this kind of business, you have to think ahead and incorporate and future-proof features that should be, or will be, legally required, instead of continuously revamping and updating everything due to short-sighted programmers. By 2013, closed captioning for online video services will be legally required, as should be the case.


Which complete ignores how much effort is required to do this.  Close captioning will always drag behind pushing out the main content - especially for less popular titles.
 
2012-12-20 03:20:41 PM  
I assume it might be impossible, but whoever finds a way to do this more flexibly/dynamically would stand to make a bundle.
 
2012-12-20 03:41:29 PM  

blue_2501: What? 120 different sizes?

1024 kbps
1025 kbps
1026 kbps
etc.

Why not just do 5 different sizes, depending on the quality of the connection?


No, it's different sizes and different codecs. So, say, 12 different codecs at 10 sizes each.
 
2012-12-20 03:43:16 PM  

LiberalWeenie: I assume it might be impossible, but whoever finds a way to do this more flexibly/dynamically would stand to make a bundle.


Transcoding something on demand is possible, but takes power. It's better to just create the 120 different copies than to have 1 copy you transcode every time someone requests it.
 
2012-12-20 04:14:31 PM  

blue_2501: Why not just do 5 different sizes, depending on the quality of the connection?


It probably is a more manageable number like that, except that they also support multiple codecs. So that 120 is the result of something like 24 codecs at five different bitrates. Except that's probably really even more complicated, since the audio and video seem to be separate-- it's probably five or six video codecs with four or five audio codecs at five different bitrates.

I couldn't find a comprehensive list of all the supported codecs after a quick google, so I gave up out of laziness.
 
2012-12-20 04:14:58 PM  

lordargent: NashMcNash: That's not precise at all.

What level of precision do you want?


More than one significant figure?
 
2012-12-20 04:15:19 PM  

jonny_q: blue_2501: What? 120 different sizes?

1024 kbps
1025 kbps
1026 kbps
etc.

Why not just do 5 different sizes, depending on the quality of the connection?

No, it's different sizes and different codecs. So, say, 12 different codecs at 10 sizes each.


Probably 2 codecs, 6 sizes, 10 DRMs
 
2012-12-20 04:35:04 PM  

robohobo: The Banana Thug: I can never get over how long it took Netflix to provide closed captioning services for their streaming selections. I'm glad they're finally on top of that, but others, like Vudu and Amazon Instant, are still lagging way, WAY behind.

If you're gonna start this kind of business, you have to think ahead and incorporate and future-proof features that should be, or will be, legally required, instead of continuously revamping and updating everything due to short-sighted programmers. By 2013, closed captioning for online video services will be legally required, as should be the case.

How much would that cost? It's only appeasing roughly 4% of the population.


Wrong. There are about 30 million people in the United States with various forms of hearing loss, ranging from severely deaf to profound enough to require hearing aids or other listening devices. Or, you know, roughly the size of Canada. As an MBA, the fact that Netflix initially ignored this valuable demographics while expending so much time and money to get into the difficult Canadian market was a facepalm for me.
 
2012-12-20 04:43:01 PM  

MugzyBrown: The Banana Thug: as should be the case

No it shouldn't


I generally follow your posts and have you pegged as a smarter-than-average Farker, so I'm genuinely curious about your reasoning behind this. Why?

But I will preempt you in any case. The writing's already on the wall, television and movie contents will be streamed via the Internet instead of cable and DVDs, and it has been proven that those who need captioning services to enjoy the same services as everyone else either have to jump through more hurdles (try finding a Blockbuster these days), or pay more (buying DVDs instead of cheap online streaming), or wait longer (movie comes on network TV few years later). Congress and President Obama himself clearly thought it was an important enough issue to sign into a law that would rectify this, and Amazon is already scrambling to come into compliance before facing heavy fines.
 
2012-12-20 05:33:41 PM  

The Banana Thug: Wrong. There are about 30 million people in the United States with various forms of hearing loss, ranging from severely deaf to profound enough to require hearing aids or other listening devices. Or, you know, roughly the size of Canada. As an MBA, the fact that Netflix initially ignored this valuable demographics while expending so much time and money to get into the difficult Canadian market was a facepalm for me.


Marketing to Canada and delivering subtitles are two extremely different technical problems with extremely different solutions.

Making things accessible is good, but your assertion is stupid to say that you shouldn't be able to put video on the Internet without CC or subtitles. It's an expensive and difficult technical issue.
 
2012-12-20 05:34:33 PM  

jonny_q: LiberalWeenie: I assume it might be impossible, but whoever finds a way to do this more flexibly/dynamically would stand to make a bundle.

Transcoding something on demand is possible, but takes power. It's better to just create the 120 different copies than to have 1 copy you transcode every time someone requests it.


This, the storage and front loaded effort are pennies compared to the cost of per-event anything.
 
2012-12-20 05:38:10 PM  

gingerjet: The Banana Thug: I can never get over how long it took Netflix to provide closed captioning services for their streaming selections. I'm glad they're finally on top of that, but others, like Vudu and Amazon Instant, are still lagging way, WAY behind.

If you're gonna start this kind of business, you have to think ahead and incorporate and future-proof features that should be, or will be, legally required, instead of continuously revamping and updating everything due to short-sighted programmers. By 2013, closed captioning for online video services will be legally required, as should be the case.

Which complete ignores how much effort is required to do this.  Close captioning will always drag behind pushing out the main content - especially for less popular titles.


Question.  I have a tiny bit of experience creating DVD's with menus and the like.  With all these titles NetFlix has... won't the DVD already have closed captioning on it?  Thus, can't they just rip it from there?
 
2012-12-20 06:08:13 PM  

downstairs: won't the DVD already have closed captioning


Yes and no. At some point someone has likely typed the text you want. But as always there are licensing issues; NetFlix may not have the right to distribute the caption text under their existing video licenses. Also many DVDs do not have text-based closed captioning, they have image-based subtitle overlays. For a variety of technical reasons those image-based subtitles don't translate well into low-res or low-size encodes, or into streaming video systems in general.
 
2012-12-20 06:34:47 PM  

jonny_q: The Banana Thug: Wrong. There are about 30 million people in the United States with various forms of hearing loss, ranging from severely deaf to profound enough to require hearing aids or other listening devices. Or, you know, roughly the size of Canada. As an MBA, the fact that Netflix initially ignored this valuable demographics while expending so much time and money to get into the difficult Canadian market was a facepalm for me.

Marketing to Canada and delivering subtitles are two extremely different technical problems with extremely different solutions.

Making things accessible is good, but your assertion is stupid to say that you shouldn't be able to put video on the Internet without CC or subtitles. It's an expensive and difficult technical issue.


First off, I certainly don't mean ALL videos. I don't care about captioning LOLcats or FAIL home videos and such (although Youtube has been great at providing automatic transcription services for those user-created contents). The new law basically says, any contents that already has closed caption through television and/or DVD mediums should be required to have closed captioning for online streaming. That's very fair and simple, and as someone just mentioned, you get the subtitles right from the DVDs and don't need to reinvent the technology for each movie or episode.

And for marketing to Canada and delivering subtitles being different, what I was trying to get at is, if Business Venture A and Business Venture B both have the same size demographics and thus similar potential revenue streams, why would you pursue A but not B? Why not hedge your bets and have your lawyers handle problem A (legal rights in Canada) and your programmers handle B (closed captioning), and double your chances of increased revenue?
 
2012-12-20 07:21:05 PM  
The Banana Thug: First off, I certainly don't mean ALL videos. I don't care about captioning LOLcats or FAIL home videos and such (although Youtube has been great at providing automatic transcription services for those user-created contents). The new law basically says, any contents that already has closed caption through television and/or DVD mediums should be required to have closed captioning for online streaming. That's very fair and simple, and as someone just mentioned, you get the subtitles right from the DVDs and don't need to reinvent the technology for each movie or episode.

I encode my DVDs into video files so that I can stick them on my media box and stream them, and it's quite a bit more difficult than "get the subtitles right from the DVDs".

1) Some DVDs have subtitles that are burned in (IE, they're not a separate data stream, but there is a whole other title on the DVD with the subtitles pre-rendered on it.). Sometimes compressing the pre-rendered subtitles results in an unreadable mess.

2) Some DVDs have multiple subtitles/CCs for English (and in some cases, the text in them differs a lot. I think one tries to replicate the dialogue in its entirety, while the other attempts to give a general synopsis (basically, I keep my TV volume low and sometimes I read the caption and I'm like "that's not what he just said, that's not even close to what he just said").

3) Some DVDs have subtitles that just suck a nut. (timing doesn't match the dialogue, subtitle stays up too short, subtitle overlays stuff, etc).
 
2012-12-20 07:22:38 PM  
Anyway, my point is, if I can find a subtitle file for something from the net, I grab it from there because it's generally way better than any of the shiat that came on the DVD itself and I can't fault amazon if they're going the DIY route.
 
2012-12-20 07:31:34 PM  

lordargent: Anyway, my point is, if I can find a subtitle file for something from the net, I grab it from there because it's generally way better than any of the shiat that came on the DVD itself and I can't fault amazon if they're going the DIY route.


lordargent: The Banana Thug: First off, I certainly don't mean ALL videos. I don't care about captioning LOLcats or FAIL home videos and such (although Youtube has been great at providing automatic transcription services for those user-created contents). The new law basically says, any contents that already has closed caption through television and/or DVD mediums should be required to have closed captioning for online streaming. That's very fair and simple, and as someone just mentioned, you get the subtitles right from the DVDs and don't need to reinvent the technology for each movie or episode.

I encode my DVDs into video files so that I can stick them on my media box and stream them, and it's quite a bit more difficult than "get the subtitles right from the DVDs".

1) Some DVDs have subtitles that are burned in (IE, they're not a separate data stream, but there is a whole other title on the DVD with the subtitles pre-rendered on it.). Sometimes compressing the pre-rendered subtitles results in an unreadable mess.

2) Some DVDs have multiple subtitles/CCs for English (and in some cases, the text in them differs a lot. I think one tries to replicate the dialogue in its entirety, while the other attempts to give a general synopsis (basically, I keep my TV volume low and sometimes I read the caption and I'm like "that's not what he just said, that's not even close to what he just said").

3) Some DVDs have subtitles that just suck a nut. (timing doesn't match the dialogue, subtitle stays up too short, subtitle overlays stuff, etc).


Many streaming videos have a "report an issue" link. Similarly, the subtitles that you get from Internet websites have voting options, to let users know which ones are accurate or not. This kind of crowd-sourcing quality assurance effort should definitely help Netflix et al ensure accuracy in their subtitles, something that couldn't be possible with DVDs.

As for "get the subtitles right from the DVDs", I guess a better way to phrase it is, when companies like Netflix gets their DVDs or the original streaming video file from the film distributors, they also get a sort of PR package that contains each movie's synopsis description and a box art cover that Netflix can slap onto their websites. As part of that package, they can simply include a subtitle text file (like a .SRT file) from the distributor. Done.
 
2012-12-20 08:12:16 PM  
They should use computers for that.
To save time.
 
2012-12-21 10:51:26 AM  
Love Netflix... And the WD TV Live set top box is the shizzle.
 
2012-12-21 12:06:16 PM  

The Banana Thug: robohobo: The Banana Thug: I can never get over how long it took Netflix to provide closed captioning services for their streaming selections. I'm glad they're finally on top of that, but others, like Vudu and Amazon Instant, are still lagging way, WAY behind.

If you're gonna start this kind of business, you have to think ahead and incorporate and future-proof features that should be, or will be, legally required, instead of continuously revamping and updating everything due to short-sighted programmers. By 2013, closed captioning for online video services will be legally required, as should be the case.

How much would that cost? It's only appeasing roughly 4% of the population.

Wrong. There are about 30 million people in the United States with various forms of hearing loss, ranging from severely deaf to profound enough to require hearing aids or other listening devices. Or, you know, roughly the size of Canada. As an MBA, the fact that Netflix initially ignored this valuable demographics while expending so much time and money to get into the difficult Canadian market was a facepalm for me.


I've always wondered why Telemundo and Univision didn't subtitle with one of the alternative CC feeds in English. I understand that it's a special interest network, but it would be a great way to be an ambassador of Latino/Hispanic/Chicano/(whatever Spanish-speaking cultural enclaves in the States are calling themselves these days) to the dominant Anglophone culture.

(I've heard they either are or will be implementing this in the near future... I've been a cord-cutter since circa 2009)
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report