Hello robots,
Two days ago, I posted a site I had just created.
http://youtubetowebm.com/
This site lets you take a youtube video, give a start and an end time, and then will return to you a webm of that youtube video.
The feedback I got last time was "There should be a button to exclude sound." I've been hard at work, and finally got that added.
Anybody want to try it out?
>The feedback I got last time was "There should be a button to exclude sound." I've been hard at work, and finally got that added.
I made that suggestion! OP is not a faggot, this time
>>29668446
Give it a try, I've also done some work to improve stability/performance. In the last thread I it failed to make a webm for about half the people who requested one. I'm aiming to do better tonight.
>>29668423
Why the fuck would it take more time to remove sound? Assuming you're using ffmpeg just throw in -an and you're done.
>>29668499
Do you mean why would it take more time to remove sound when generating a specific webm? This is just something I've observed while testing it personally. Removing sound from video files can be extremely slow.
It seems to depend on the formats involved. Removing the sound as you go from one format to another is slower than removing the sound from a webm file.
YouTube doesn't offer all videos in all formats, and sometimes they offer videos of very low quality or without audio. So, there will be times when you have to download a video format that isn't webm, and then changing the format and removing sound will take a long time. The warning is on the webpage because it's better to warn people about things taking too long and have them be pleasantly surprised, than not warn them and have them think it broke.
If you mean why it took me so long to do it (a couple days) the reason is because I was simultaneously making a couple other improvements to the polling model and on the server to make it queue requests so it doesn't knock the server over (along with a few other minor improvements).
Also, please reply in this thread if it is broken for you somehow. Nobody has used it from this thread (or my logging is broken).
thanks 0P testing
Error: Bad video stream. Only VP8 is supported.
What does this mean?
>>29668597
I guess it depends on how you're doing it. I would use youtube-dl and ffmpeg. How exactly are you removing sound?
VP8?
>>29668717
>>29668764
Just so I'm clear - you're getting the VP8 error message only on uploading it to 4chan, right? The webm actually works on my site?
As far as what it means - I suppose it means I'll have to figure that out and tweak some settings to get it to encode in a format that 4chan will support.
>>29668740
My intuition was that removing the sound from files would actually be very fast - like, just don't copy this data fast. However, in practice, it actually turns out to take a significant amount of time. Perhaps this is because transcoding is inherently a costly operation, and transcoding and editing the data simultaneously is even more expensive.
Great work OP. I actually just got on my computer to buy a website. What would you recommend for someone who doesn't know too much about this? Wix?
How did you buy your site?
I'm just trying to reserve it.
>>29668882
Thanks, I appreciate that. This is my first attempt at web development and I actually didn't use any specific tutorials or wikis at all. Just kind of banging my head against how I thought it should work and then lots and lots of google. Stack Overflow posts and random forums were my guides.
As far as buying a website, I bought the domain name through google. 12 dollars for a year. The server running this site is hosted through digital ocean (20 dollars a month).
Digital Ocean is actually pretty sweet. Let me know if you want an invite code (I don't think it does anything for you, but it gets me 20 dollars of digital ocean credit - if you pay for a month or something).
>>29668845
What I'm getting at is that the difference in encoding time between keeping audio and getting rid of audio when using ffmpeg is negligible. I don't know how you've managed to make it take longer.
>>29668989
I understand why you'd think that. That was my expectation too. All I can tell you is that when I was testing it out, getting rid of audio took substantially longer.
>>29669034
I have a hard time believing you when my webm converter shows the exact opposite.
>>29669066
Why would I lie about it? I don't know what more I can say. Those are the results I observed while testing it.
>>29668423
How ya gonna monetize it though, goy?
>>29669104
It's just odd, I can only imagine that you're doing something wrong. But then again, I have no idea what your exact process is for doing this and I have little experience with webdev.
>>29669108
I signed up for an Amazon referral link program. I can put an ad for an Amazon gift card on the site, and I'll get 6% of all gift card balance purchased through the link. It's a pretty good deal for an add I feel, and anyone could buy an Amazon gift card.
My planned ad goes something like:
"They need a gift. You need it to get there in time. Why not do the absolute minimum" And then image and link to the gift card - just stuck on the otherwise empty right side.
That said, I probably won't go to the trouble of putting the ad up there. I don't think it will get enough traffic to justify the ad. If it is a few people a day, then it won't ever justify the expense of running the server.
>>29668956
Can you please add me on Skype? I'm about to take you up on this, but I'd like you to call me and save the typing.
Skype: hack_blastard
>>29669193
I'm heading out to go eat at subway right now, so I won't do audio until I get back. Post your Skype name and I'll message you.
>>29669217
Once again, Skype is 'hack_blastard'.
Using your advice and trying to design one with Google sites. Wix tried to charge me 200 for a year.
this is a fucking godsend thank you
