W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2010

[whatwg] audio and video: volume and muted as content attributes?

From: Ashley Sheridan <ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:45:33 +0100
Message-ID: <1276173933.2247.11.camel@localhost>
On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 12:32 +1000, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Ashley Sheridan
> <ash at ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>         
>         On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 12:03 +1000, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>         
>         > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Ashley Sheridan
>         > <ash at ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
>         > 
>         >         
>         >         On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 11:52 +1000, Silvia Pfeiffer
>         >         wrote: 
>         >         
>         >         > I don't think that is possible in the way that the volume attribute is
>         >         > currently defined as a value between [0;1]. That is an orthogonal, but
>         >         > still important question about the volume attribute then.
>         >         > 
>         >         > So, if you say 300%, I assume you mean 3 times louder than what the
>         >         > track is given as? I do wonder how to do that with the current volume
>         >         > attribute - right now the spec says that the default value set is 1.0
>         >         > [1]. It seems that means we cannot amplify a quiet audio track but
>         >         > have to rely on the user to turn up the volume on their computer? I
>         >         > would actually prefer if the default setting was something like 0.5
>         >         > and we could then turn the volume up or down in javascript or
>         >         > preferably event through a content attribute as mentioned.
>         >         > 
>         >         > Cheers,
>         >         > Silvia.
>         >         > 
>         >         > [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html#dom-media-volume
>         >         > 
>         >         > 
>         >         > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Kevin Marks <kevinmarks at gmail.com> wrote:
>         >         > > Setting volume above 1.0 can be very useful if the original is too quiet.
>         >         > > For example, Quicktime allows a volume of 300% to amplify quiet tracks
>         >         > >
>         >         > > On May 31, 2010 11:30 PM, "Philip J?genstedt" <philipj at opera.com> wrote:
>         >         > >
>         >         > > On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 14:17:03 +0800, Silvia Pfeiffer
>         >         > > <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>         >         > >
>         >         > >> On Tue, Ju...
>         >         > >
>         >         > > This would make volume even more special, as a float that reflects as an
>         >         > > integer percentage. Just using the existing definition for reflecting a
>         >         > > float would be simpler.
>         >         > >
>         >         > >>> So, I am neither in favor or against of reflecting volume and mute as
>         >         > >>> content attributes. Im...
>         >         > >
>         >         > > I'd be fine with reflecting muted if many people think it would be useful.
>         >         > > I'm not the one to make that judgment though.
>         >         > >
>         >         > > Volume isn't a huge problem, just not as trivial as one might suspect.
>         >         > > Another thing to consider is that it is currently impossible to set volume
>         >         > > to a value outside the range [0,1] via the DOM API. With a content
>         >         > > attribute, volume="-1" and volume="1.1" would need to be handled too. I'd
>         >         > > prefer it being ignored rather than being clamped.
>         >         > >
>         >         > >>> [1]
>         >         > >>>
>         >         > >>> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/urls.html#reflect
>         >         > >>
>         >         > >>
>         >         > >>
>         >         > >> Ch...
>         >         > >
>         >         > > --
>         >         > > Philip J?genstedt
>         >         > > Core Developer
>         >         > > Opera Software
>         >         
>         >         
>         >         
>         >         Or you could just raise the volume of the audio
>         >         track itself. I think being able to raise the volume
>         >         like this (beyond 100% of what it is) with script
>         >         just makes it something more likely to be abused
>         >         (think how the TV adverts always seem twice as loud
>         >         as the programs they surround) and so will end up
>         >         getting blocked more often. 
>         >         
>         >         
>         >         
>         >         
>         > 
>         > 
>         > That requires editing the resource. Think about it from a
>         > process point-of-view: you're a Web developer and have been
>         > given a set of media resources to put on a Website. As you
>         > put it all together, you notice that the volume of the
>         > different files is different and thus playing them back next
>         > to each other will create a very confusing user experience.
>         > Do you really want to shoot the files back to the production
>         > to adjust the volume settings so they are all similar? If
>         > you're under time pressure, you'd probably much prefer just
>         > setting a volume attribute on each so they all play back
>         > with the same level.
>         > 
>         > 
>         > Your example of TV ads being louder than the rest of the
>         > program is indeed a production issue but would not
>         > replicable through a volume setting for the resource, since
>         > that volume applies to the whole resource and not just to
>         > the ad clip inside it. I don't think that kind of abuse
>         > would originate from JavaScript - it already originates from
>         > production and doesn't really apply to this issue.
>         > 
>         > 
>         > Cheers,
>         > Silvia.
>         > 
>         > 
>         
>         
>         
>         
>         If, like you mentioned in your example, all the media files
>         are of different volumes, then your script would have to
>         somehow detect the actual real volume of them in order to give
>         the right level of adjustment for normalisation, something
>         which I don't believe is possible just at the moment.
>         
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is possible, but not necessary. You can just make some changes
> yourself - after all, it's only done once, since the resources won't
> change.
> 
> 
>  
>         If I was in such a situation, yes I would most likely send
>         them back to the post production team, or at the very least
>         normalise them myself with ffmpeg or some similar tool.
>         
> 
> 
> Yes, sure you can. But should it be the only possibility?
> 
> 
>  
>         It would be like sourcing a bunch of images for a website and
>         using canvas to applying a filter to adjust the light volumes
>         of them all. Sure, it might be possible, but the images really
>         should have been adjusted before they were used on the site.
>         Why should we encourage sloppy content producers?
> 
> 
> If you get the videos from different producers, how should they be
> able to normalise the volume?
> 
> 
> Silvia.
> 
> 

There are ways that the different producers can normalise the files,
even if there are many producers. I used to work in a post production
house, so I know this is possible.

Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100610/15e8a88b/attachment.htm>
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2010 05:45:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:24 UTC