.WMV

Aug 30, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Hey, so ive got the new build working nicely but i dont see any format options for converting to .wmv, is this a planned option? or is it there already and im just missing something (O_o)

 

Thanks, Dragon.

Jan 25, 2011 at 1:15 PM

*Bump* Any updates? :)

Apr 7, 2011 at 9:23 PM

*Bump* Any updates? :)

Coordinator
Apr 15, 2011 at 10:32 PM
Yes. err, maybe... I am sorry for not logging on for a long while, and while i havn't done much work, I will upload a file, (in like 5 minutes) that has as much of the thing done that will get done in the next few weeks. I WILL, however, start back working on the project soon, and should have better updates later..


From: [email removed]
To: [email removed]
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:23:21 -0700
Subject: Re: .WMV [VBffmpegWrapper:225287]

From: dragonrose
*Bump* Any updates? :)
Read the full discussion online.
To add a post to this discussion, reply to this email (VBffmpegWrapper@discussions.codeplex.com)
To start a new discussion for this project, email VBffmpegWrapper@discussions.codeplex.com
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this discussion on CodePlex. You can unsubscribe or change your settings on codePlex.com.
Please note: Images and attachments will be removed from emails. Any posts to this discussion will also be available online at codeplex.com
Coordinator
Apr 15, 2011 at 10:48 PM

ok, i uploaded whatever i had. Also note that i wasnt able to add support for wmv.. Wish i could, but you have to talk to Microsoft about that. The compiled binary of ffmpeg wont do wmv because its propietary or something. You might be able to do it if you switched the version of ff-mpeg that i used with one that either you compiled yourself, or maybe one that still has all the stuff unlocked.. // But then again, it has been awhile.. So im not entirely sure. 

Coordinator
Apr 19, 2011 at 8:06 AM
Did you get a chance to look at the sample.. As is it will convert a file to mkv.. and as you see the progress IS working. But i have another idea, and i would like your input: The progress works now by an event handler, which you have to delegate if you wanted the progress.. I was thinking about making it a little simpler by changing it so the user could set it on a timer or something.. for example..

Dim testcoder as new encoder()
'testcoder crap, like testcoder.file*****
'then
testcoder.encode
'then you could have a while loop or something. for example..
while encoder.IsEncoding = true 'doesnt exist yet, so dont try calling it, just an example of something i would code in the class..
progressbar.value = encoder.progress 'again, .progress doesnt exist, just something i could add...
'sleep or some other timer
threading.thread.sleep
end while

Anyways, the reason i ask is because I am going to start working on it again. fixing the bugs and whatnot. I am just wondering if the way i have it now would be easier(or more efficient) or if doing it the other way would be easier and more efficient..

Apr 19, 2011 at 7:49 PM

Hey, ive not had chance to check it out yet, i have grabbed it tho, so ill check it out tonight then post back, but at quick glance, i know alot of new users get stuck when it comes to delegating, so having  a loop whilst the encoding is taking place would be the easiest option for most users to be able to work with

Coordinator
Apr 20, 2011 at 7:18 AM
Thats what i was thinking also. Of course, if the user wants to update the UI while multi threading they will have to use a delegate anyway, but for those that just want a simple quick thing then it would work. Ill add both of them in, as im sure later ill have a use for just calling and returning JUST the progress percent. you know, maybe for sending the progress to another machine or a desktop gadget or something when im batch encoding files.


From: [email removed]
To: [email removed]
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 11:49:07 -0700
Subject: Re: .WMV [VBffmpegWrapper:225287]

From: dragonrose

Hey, ive not had chance to check it out yet, i have grabbed it tho, so ill check it out tonight then post back, but at quick glance, i know alot of new users get stuck when it comes to delegating, so having a loop whilst the encoding is taking place would be the easiest option for most users to be able to work with
ails. Any posts to this discussion will also be available online at codeplex.com
Apr 24, 2011 at 10:39 PM

If having them both in there is easy enough to do, then that sounds like a good idea!