Re: The Image Stream Processing pipeline/s

On 09/06/2013 07:43 PM, Rachel Blum wrote:
> I think it's helpful to think of MediaRecorder not as a recorder per
> se, but as a way to encode/mux a number of streams to a specific
> format. It's more a MediaTranscoder :)

The other important property, and the one that makes it make sense for
me to call it a "recorder" and not a "transcoder", is that it abandons
any attempt at synchronization.

What comes out of the recorder comes on the recorder's schedule, and the
recorder will make no attempt to make its output appear with millisecond
exactness - in fact, the normal case will be delay "until it's
convenient to release the buffer".

>
> The piece that's missing for your "new" pipeline, i.e. one that
> doesn't need to route through <canvas> and <video> elements is a way
> to go from MediaStream to a continuous sequence of e.g. ImageData
> objects, and back for the final encoding. I'm tempted to call those
> "WebVideoNode" objects, since this is an idea very similar to WebAudio
> processing.
>
> I'm not aware anybody is working on this right now, but it certainly
> would be a very useful thing to have.

We've discussed connecting mediastreams directly to Canvas, but decided
that this was not a "version 1" feature, and probably better done by the
people who like Canvas rather than the people most active here.

Received on Sunday, 8 September 2013 10:24:53 UTC