Recherche avancée

Médias (91)

Autres articles (57)

  • Personnaliser en ajoutant son logo, sa bannière ou son image de fond

    5 septembre 2013, par

    Certains thèmes prennent en compte trois éléments de personnalisation : l’ajout d’un logo ; l’ajout d’une bannière l’ajout d’une image de fond ;

  • Qualité du média après traitement

    21 juin 2013, par

    Le bon réglage du logiciel qui traite les média est important pour un équilibre entre les partis ( bande passante de l’hébergeur, qualité du média pour le rédacteur et le visiteur, accessibilité pour le visiteur ). Comment régler la qualité de son média ?
    Plus la qualité du média est importante, plus la bande passante sera utilisée. Le visiteur avec une connexion internet à petit débit devra attendre plus longtemps. Inversement plus, la qualité du média est pauvre et donc le média devient dégradé voire (...)

  • Pas question de marché, de cloud etc...

    10 avril 2011

    Le vocabulaire utilisé sur ce site essaie d’éviter toute référence à la mode qui fleurit allègrement
    sur le web 2.0 et dans les entreprises qui en vivent.
    Vous êtes donc invité à bannir l’utilisation des termes "Brand", "Cloud", "Marché" etc...
    Notre motivation est avant tout de créer un outil simple, accessible à pour tout le monde, favorisant
    le partage de créations sur Internet et permettant aux auteurs de garder une autonomie optimale.
    Aucun "contrat Gold ou Premium" n’est donc prévu, aucun (...)

Sur d’autres sites (11359)

  • Process audio and video independently

    27 février 2012, par Eric

    due to the unpopularity of my last posts here and here , I'll try something else.
    I have corresponding audio (.wav) and video files (.mpg). Let's consider that those two streams where recorded synchronously. I want to process both stream, with opencv for the images, and with "I don't know which audio lib" (you tell me ?) for audio, and I want to process those streams online and keep the synchronicity.
    Note that the length of the video is less that 2 minutes.

    Thanks for any help !

  • Changes to the WebM Open Source License

    4 juin 2010, par noreply@blogger.com (John Luther)

    You’ll see on the WebM license page and in our source code repositories that we’ve made a small change to our open source license. There were a couple of issues that popped up after we released WebM at Google I/O a couple weeks ago, specifically around how the patent clause was written.

    As it was originally written, if a patent action was brought against Google, the patent license terminated. This provision itself is not unusual in an OSS license, and similar provisions exist in the 2nd Apache License and in version 3 of the GPL. The twist was that ours terminated "any" rights and not just rights to the patents, which made our license GPLv3 and GPLv2 incompatible. Also, in doing this, we effectively created a potentially new open source copyright license, something we are loath to do.

    Using patent language borrowed from both the Apache and GPLv3 patent clauses, in this new iteration of the patent clause we’ve decoupled patents from copyright, thus preserving the pure BSD nature of the copyright license. This means we are no longer creating a new open source copyright license, and the patent grant can exist on its own. Additionally, we have updated the patent grant language to make it clearer that the grant includes the right to modify the code and give it to others. (We’ve updated the licensing FAQ to reflect these changes as well.)

    We’ve also added a definition for the "this implementation" language, to make that more clear.

    Thanks for your patience as we worked through this, and we hope you like, enjoy and (most importantly) use WebM and join with us in creating more freedom online. We had a lot of help on these changes, so thanks to our friends in open source and free software who traded many emails, often at odd hours, with us.

    Chris DiBona is the Open Source Programs Manager at Google.

  • Optical Drive Value Proposition

    28 août 2010, par Multimedia Mike — General

    I have the absolute worst luck in the optical drive department. Ever since I started building my own computers in 1995 — close to the beginning of the CD-ROM epoch — I have burned through a staggering number of optical drives. Seriously, especially in the time period between about 1995-1998, I was going through a new drive every 4-6 months or so. This was also during that CD-ROM speed race where the the drive packages kept advertising loftier ‘X’ speed ratings. I didn’t play a lot of CD-ROM games during that timeframe, though I did listen to quite a few audio CDs through the computer.



    I use “optical drive” as a general term to describe CD-ROM drives, CD-R/RW drives, DVD-ROM drives, DVD-R/RW drives, and drives capable of doing any combination of reading and writing CDs and DVDs. In my observation, optical media seems to be falling out of favor somewhat, giving way to online digital distribution for things like games and software, as well as flash drives and external hard drives vs. recordable or rewritable media for backup and sneakernet duty. Somewhere along the line, I started to buy computers that didn’t even have optical drives. That’s why I have purchased at least 2 external USB drives (seen in the picture above). I don’t have much confidence that either works correctly. My main desktop until recently, a Mac Mini, has an internal optical drive that grew flaky and unreliable a few months after the unit was purchased.

    I just have really rotten luck with optical drives. The most reliable drive in my house is the one on the headless machine that, until recently, was the main workhorse on the FATE farm. The eject switch didn’t work correctly so I have to log in remotely, 'sudo eject', walk to the other room, pop in the disc, walk back to the other room, and work with the disc.

    Maybe optical media is on its way out, but I still have many hundreds of CD-ROMs. Perhaps I should move forward on this brainstorm to archive all of my optical discs on hard drives (and then think of some data mining experiments, just for the academic appeal), before it’s too late ; optical discs don’t last forever.

    So if I needed a good optical drive, what should I consider ? I’ve always been the type to go cheap, I admit. Many of my optical drives were on the lower end of the cost spectrum, which might have played some role in their rapid replacement. However, I’m not sold on the idea that I’m getting quality just because I’m paying a higher price. That LG unit at the top of the pile up there was relatively pricey and still didn’t fare well in the long (or even medium) term.

    Come to think of it, I used to have a ridiculous stockpile of castoff (but somehow still functional) optical drives. So many, in fact, that in 2004 I had a full size PC tower that I filled with 4 working drives, just because I could. Okay, I admit that there was a period where I had some reliable drives.

    That might be an idea, actually– throw together such a computer for heavy duty archival purposes. I visited Weird Stuff Warehouse today (needed some PC100 RAM for an old machine and they came through) and I think I could put together such a box rather cheaply.

    It’s a dirty job, but… well, you know the rest.