It is currently 22 Jun 2017, 23:10



CasparCG Server 2.1 status

CasparCG Server, Client and development

Moderators: Macey, Jonas Hummelstrand, didikunz

CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Helge Norberg » 09 Sep 2016, 15:28

Questions has been popping up here and there about CasparCG Server 2.1 and the current status, when it will be released and so on.

I will use this thread to shed light on the progress. What I'm currently doing is this:

  • Fixing bugs introduced by me in the FFMpeg module when I have implemented support for:

    • Using audio from multiple audio streams. Audio is often arranged like that in MXF files.
    • Framerate conversion.
    • Changing playback speed of clips.
  • Writing automated test cases in JUnit for the server to make the manual tedious testing before a release to become less needed. I will put this up on github when it is polished enough.
  • Working on instability issues with Quad 2 and Duo 2.
  • Taking Armin up to speed on the CasparCG Project.

This is what still needs to be done (that I can think of):

  • Merge ffmpeg_consumer and streaming_consumer into one and use ffmpeg_pipeline there. Implementing file_sink in ffmpeg_pipeline is needed first.
  • The reverse of "Using audio from multiple audio streams" -- Possibility to record in that way.
  • Remove frame_muxer and instead use ffmpeg_pipeline in decklink_producer.
  • Update the changelog and readme.

What I could use help with is:

  • Determining what points I have forgotten above.
  • Comparing 2.0.7 and 2.1.0 feature-wise and behavior-wise, and letting me know if there is something that I have forgotten to merge from 2.0.7 and 2.1 or if I have introduced some breaking change.

I will not say anything about release dates, it will only create disappointment if they are not fulfilled.
Helge Norberg
 
Posts: 62
Joined: 01 Jun 2012, 13:42

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Jesper Stærkær » 09 Sep 2016, 15:50

Good to hear Helge! Glad you and Armin take some time to give us updates in the forum and at Github.

I intend to write a full test suite for AMCP commands through our node.js casparcg-connection library. This will run against an Amazon windows instance to test the 2.1 AMCP protocol: all commands with various combinations of valid and invalid parameters.

Having Travis-CI in the pipeline for casparcg-connection could in the future mean doing automated tests agains the latest builds of CasparCG Server, both Linux and Windows.

I guess the AMCP implementation isn't your biggest concern at this stage. But working my way through it over the last few months has already revealed some strange and/or undocumented behaviour, as previously discussed directly or through Github issues.
Jesper Stærkær
Independent Consultant at SuperFly.tv
User avatar
Jesper Stærkær
 
Posts: 853
Joined: 13 Apr 2010, 18:06
Location: Trondheim, Norway

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Jesper Stærkær » 10 Sep 2016, 20:20

Additional critical points:
Jesper Stærkær
Independent Consultant at SuperFly.tv
User avatar
Jesper Stærkær
 
Posts: 853
Joined: 13 Apr 2010, 18:06
Location: Trondheim, Norway

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby itod » 10 Sep 2016, 22:11

Jesper Stærkær wrote:Additional critical points:
  • Upgrade CEF producer. To gain font smoothing and GPU-accellerated (WebGL) off-screen rendering.


+1
Please, Helge, please...
itod
 
Posts: 105
Joined: 29 Oct 2011, 20:54

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby deedos » 12 Sep 2016, 16:31

+1 for CEF upgrade! Many relying on this
cheers
deedos
 
Posts: 36
Joined: 05 Dec 2012, 13:05

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby mktsgm » 13 Sep 2016, 17:39

Hi,

It is nice to hear that people are working on CasparCG Server 2.1. We are eagerly waiting for it.

I would like to add my observations. I downloaded
Code: Select all
CasparCG Server 70235ae09df45c874e133fd4d3fcc1e6e34e993a_windows.7z
updated on 9/9/2016.

It is working alright with Decklink Duo2. But it is not seeking to particular frame. The code (.NET) with which I wrote in VB and working with 2.0.7/Duo is not working in 2.1/Duo2. Especially, the seeking the frame and OSC as well.

kindly look into these.

Thanks,
User avatar
mktsgm
 
Posts: 72
Joined: 14 Apr 2012, 13:39

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Jonas Hummelstrand » 13 Sep 2016, 19:40

For those that aren't aware; current beta builds of CasparCG Server 2.1 can be downloaded at http://builds.casparcg.com/

Please post bug reports and feature requests as GitHub issues, so the developers can keep track of them:

Jonas Hummelstrand
Independent Consultant at SuperFly.tv
Former Community Manager for CasparCG

Problems? Guide to posting Bug reports & Feature requests
User avatar
Jonas Hummelstrand
 
Posts: 2538
Joined: 21 Apr 2009, 08:07
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Helge Norberg » 23 Sep 2016, 13:31

Helge Norberg wrote:This is what still needs to be done (that I can think of):

  • Merge ffmpeg_consumer and streaming_consumer into one and use ffmpeg_pipeline there. Implementing file_sink in ffmpeg_pipeline is needed first.
  • The reverse of "Using audio from multiple audio streams" -- Possibility to record in that way.
  • Remove frame_muxer and instead use ffmpeg_pipeline in decklink_producer.


Update: After some discussions with pros/cons we have now started to lean towards using the 2.0.7 ffmpeg producer in 2.1.0 because it is much more stable. I will still try to keep framerate_producer in the mix (and reimplement "Using audio from multiple audio streams".

Question: The architecture in 2.1.0 depends on producers always deinterlacing their frames before they are sent to the mixer. This means that if you are playing an 1080i file on a 1080i channel without MIXER commands requiring deinterlacing, it will be deinterlaced and reinterlaced anyway. This simplifies the code a lot but will force a performance and possibly a quality penalty on interlaced material being played. Both geometric mixer transforms and framerate conversion/speed change mechanism depends on incoming material being progressive. What are your thoughts on this?

A possible solution would be for the user to be required to know before-hand if they intend to do geometric transforms or speed changes and therefore pass FILTER DEINTERLACE_BOB. In the case of framerate conversion Caspar can detect the need automatically though.
Helge Norberg
 
Posts: 62
Joined: 01 Jun 2012, 13:42

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Jesper Stærkær » 23 Sep 2016, 13:59

Adding an extra parameter in LOAD doesn't seem that bad. Somehow saying: "straight 1:1 content, no funny business" to avoid the de/re-interlacing. This should be opt-in.
Jesper Stærkær
Independent Consultant at SuperFly.tv
User avatar
Jesper Stærkær
 
Posts: 853
Joined: 13 Apr 2010, 18:06
Location: Trondheim, Norway

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby maurice78 » 25 Sep 2016, 20:35

Hi Helge

is this "old" producer already back on github ?
i have issue #482 can this be solved with the old producer perhaps ?

thanks
maurice78
 
Posts: 122
Joined: 28 May 2013, 21:51

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Helge Norberg » 26 Sep 2016, 11:30

maurice78 wrote:Hi Helge

is this "old" producer already back on github ?
i have issue #482 can this be solved with the old producer perhaps ?

thanks


It is not back yet. I am working on that.
Regarding #482, it should be unrelated.
Helge Norberg
 
Posts: 62
Joined: 01 Jun 2012, 13:42

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby itod » 26 Sep 2016, 13:35

Helge Norberg wrote:
Helge Norberg wrote:Question: The architecture in 2.1.0 depends on producers always deinterlacing their frames before they are sent to the mixer. This means that if you are playing an 1080i file on a 1080i channel without MIXER commands requiring deinterlacing, it will be deinterlaced and reinterlaced anyway. This simplifies the code a lot but will force a performance and possibly a quality penalty on interlaced material being played. Both geometric mixer transforms and framerate conversion/speed change mechanism depends on incoming material being progressive. What are your thoughts on this?


People using 1080i instead of 1080p are not aiming for maximum quality anyway, if they do they would be using 1080p, so quality penalty of deinterlacing/reinterlacing should not be critical. Performance penalty on the other hand could be an issue if it is significant, how bad is it in practice?
itod
 
Posts: 105
Joined: 29 Oct 2011, 20:54

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Jesper Stærkær » 26 Sep 2016, 14:17

iTod: i50/59.94 is the defacto standard for broadcasting. We must treat this as the default and optimise for it. I can not agree with your reasoning on this.
Jesper Stærkær
Independent Consultant at SuperFly.tv
User avatar
Jesper Stærkær
 
Posts: 853
Joined: 13 Apr 2010, 18:06
Location: Trondheim, Norway

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby peteraellig » 26 Sep 2016, 15:28

100% agree with Jesper, the complete Broadcast World is interlaced, 1080i50/59.94. At least on the production side. See the television production at the Olympics in Rio, over 60 OB Vans with over 800 broadcast cameras from all over the world did their productions in 1080i59.94 or 1080i/50.
All P productions are mostly in the Event World or from the "filmlook" companies.
So the question is: is Caspar CG mainly a broadcast or event tool.
peteraellig
 
Posts: 64
Joined: 30 Nov 2015, 20:40

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby didikunz » 26 Sep 2016, 19:35

peteraellig wrote:So the question is: is Caspar CG mainly a broadcast or event tool.


It's main sponsor is a national broadcaster (SVT) so the question is answered.

I also think we should mainly optimize for interlace. But it would be good, if we could manage to get it to look good in either mode. Because the streaming world is mostly also work in progressive...
Didi Kunz
CasparCG Client-Programmer, Template Maker & Live CG-Operator
Media Support, CH-5722 Gränichen, Switzerland http://mediasupport.ch/
Problems? Guide to posting Bug reports & Feature requests
User avatar
didikunz
 
Posts: 3477
Joined: 10 May 2010, 09:08
Location: Aarau, Switzerland

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby maurice78 » 26 Sep 2016, 20:47

well i'm from event's world. but with one leg in broadcast world.

Off coarse progressive is the best way to go in the end!

(where i must say that for motion portrayal 1080p25 looks worse then 1080i25 )

But the real world is different broadcast is interlaced on the moment!
and will be for a while, as a broadcast tool CCG should do interlaced as best as possible !

and as a event's man.
When it comes to the bigger event's you will find your self handling and giving
interlaced feeds to broadcasters so please let it be the best possible

i guess 1080i will be the last interlaced standard but we have to live with it for some years to come.

LS
maurice78
 
Posts: 122
Joined: 28 May 2013, 21:51

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby itod » 27 Sep 2016, 10:22

peteraellig wrote:All P productions are mostly in the Event World or from the "filmlook" companies.
So the question is: is Caspar CG mainly a broadcast or event tool.


You have to ask the question: Why the "filmlook" companies are working exclusively in progressive mode? - The quality of the picture of course. I'm not saying CCG should not work well with interlaced, I work with interlaced mode most of the time, just saying that the quality penalty of deinterlacing/reinterlacing should not be a big issue in broadcast where many things are "acceptable", and that performance penalty of that process is more problematic since you don't want your setup working without some reserves.
itod
 
Posts: 105
Joined: 29 Oct 2011, 20:54

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Michel » 27 Sep 2016, 16:27

Jesper Stærkær wrote:iTod: i50/59.94 is the defacto standard for broadcasting. We must treat this as the default and optimise for it. I can not agree with your reasoning on this.

Idem... ;)

itod wrote:....just saying that the quality penalty of deinterlacing/reinterlacing should not be a big issue in broadcast where many things are "acceptable"....

Many things are "acceptable", and that's precisely one of the big problems in Broadcasting today...
The broadcast quality criteria are often neglected.... :(
Any codec, any format, any convertion process is good as long as the thing is visible and audible...This is so common today...

Friendly ;)
Michel
 
Posts: 58
Joined: 20 Feb 2015, 22:48

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby ASmith3006 » 18 Oct 2016, 10:34

Great work on the 2.1 release, it sounds fantastic.

+1 for CEF upgrade.

I don't know about this sort of thing so please excuse my ignorance, but how hard would it be to make it so future updates to CEF could be a "drop-in" replacement (at the risk of the end-user obviously - it would be untested by SVT)
ASmith3006
 
Posts: 66
Joined: 12 Dec 2013, 14:47

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Theo » 19 Oct 2016, 17:23

A lot of stuff seems to work allright with the latest 2.1 build (october 2016)
- MXF files now play with transparent audio output
- audio is not always 100% in sync, needs some more testing
- there's colorloss with file recorder with any codec (colorspace seems not right for HD)
Regards,
Theo Kooijmans
UniversalDV
User avatar
Theo
 
Posts: 92
Joined: 03 Jun 2012, 10:44
Location: The Netherlands

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby premultiply » 21 Oct 2016, 09:50

Theo wrote:- there's colorloss with file recorder with any codec (colorspace seems not right for HD)


Maybe only some parameters needs to be added to the FFMPEG consumer to indicate BT.709 operation and using "not fullrange" values in the written files.

For x264 encoder this is done by
Code: Select all
-x264opts colorprim=bt709:transfer=bt709:colormatrix=bt709:fullrange=off
for example. Maybe other encoders have similar options.
premultiply
 
Posts: 69
Joined: 11 Jun 2013, 19:00

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Theo » 01 Nov 2016, 13:34

This doesn't effect the colorloss.
I don't think it has to do with X264 codec because it's also wrong with RAW, MXF and quicktime codecs
Regards,
Theo Kooijmans
UniversalDV
User avatar
Theo
 
Posts: 92
Joined: 03 Jun 2012, 10:44
Location: The Netherlands

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby premultiply » 01 Nov 2016, 13:43

Then try it with bt601 instead please if this changes anything.
Just trying to find out where the issues comes from...
premultiply
 
Posts: 69
Joined: 11 Jun 2013, 19:00

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Theo » 01 Nov 2016, 16:11

I get a error when I send this
ADD 1 FILE Testcap.mp4 -x264opts colorprim=bt601:transfer=bt601:colormatrix=bt601:fullrange=off

If I send
ADD 1 FILE Testcap.mp4 -x264opts colorprim=bt709:transfer=bt709:colormatrix=bt709:fullrange=off
I get a file with color loss

IF I send
ADD 1 FILE "Testcap.mp4" -x264opts colorprim=bt709:transfer=bt709:colormatrix=bt709:fullrange=on
color is good but blacklevel/contrast is effected
Regards,
Theo Kooijmans
UniversalDV
User avatar
Theo
 
Posts: 92
Joined: 03 Jun 2012, 10:44
Location: The Netherlands

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Theo » 03 Nov 2016, 14:45

As soon as I use bt601 anywhere I get an error....
Regards,
Theo Kooijmans
UniversalDV
User avatar
Theo
 
Posts: 92
Joined: 03 Jun 2012, 10:44
Location: The Netherlands

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Theo » 28 Nov 2016, 15:48

Update with latest 2.1 build
We now can record with bt709 colorspace but...
- all h264 files always record in yuv444 format and bitrate is ignored
- all MXF files always record in yuv420, so HDcam yuv422 setting is ignored.

So in general -pix_fmt yuv422p and bitrate is ignored
Regards,
Theo Kooijmans
UniversalDV
User avatar
Theo
 
Posts: 92
Joined: 03 Jun 2012, 10:44
Location: The Netherlands

CasparCG Server 2 1 status

Postby Howardjouts » 01 Dec 2016, 10:28

Is there a reason to reset the status line every turn like that? Or to rephrase, is there any disadvantage to using that code to get rid of the flicker?
User avatar
Howardjouts
 
Posts: 1
Joined: 28 Nov 2016, 10:53
Location: Poland

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Helge Norberg » 09 Feb 2017, 14:14

We would like feedback on what parts of CasparCG Server 2.1.0 the community finds most unstable and needing the most attention before a final release.

Currently we feel that it is hard to find major showstoppers, except the channel hang https://github.com/CasparCG/Server/issues/539 that we are looking into.
Helge Norberg
 
Posts: 62
Joined: 01 Jun 2012, 13:42

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby premultiply » 09 Feb 2017, 16:05

Yes the "channel freeze" is currently the major showstopper. It even made me stop testing the nightly builds.

Personally I would prefer if compatibility with last or at least a more recent Flash version could be validated.
I am still hoping that instant replay/slow motion/play while record will be included in final release - preferable using a well known media file container format.
And at least there seem to be some issues with the PSD producer where text layers are repositioned on CasparCG output which would be nice to be fixed before final release if possible.


But so many thanks for your great work until now!
premultiply
 
Posts: 69
Joined: 11 Jun 2013, 19:00

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby didikunz » 09 Feb 2017, 19:15

Added a little feature request: https://github.com/CasparCG/Server/issues/551
Didi Kunz
CasparCG Client-Programmer, Template Maker & Live CG-Operator
Media Support, CH-5722 Gränichen, Switzerland http://mediasupport.ch/
Problems? Guide to posting Bug reports & Feature requests
User avatar
didikunz
 
Posts: 3477
Joined: 10 May 2010, 09:08
Location: Aarau, Switzerland

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby vimlesh1975 » 17 Feb 2017, 07:26

Theo wrote:In general -pix_fmt yuv422p and bitrate is ignored

I used server build of 14th February 2017 and this seems to remain unsolved.
User avatar
vimlesh1975
 
Posts: 602
Joined: 29 Aug 2011, 11:42
Location: Doordarshan, Mumbai, India

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby laroca » 28 Feb 2017, 20:16

Hi, im looking for the new release of caspar cg server. Actually i have a machine working whit 2.0.6 server becouse 2.0.7 have problems whit noise and clips in the audio output. This week i need to assembly a new machine for a 4 channels playout server for a live broadcast production, but i have a question. In owr production environment we need to send to the audio console the stereo output per any video channel output. But in the server
I can not send audio from each video channel separately to the audio interface outputs. In the new server this is possible? i have many audio interfaces for doing this, usb and firewire. In the other side, in the new machine im going to have a new intel corei7 7700 processor, but this processor cant support windows 7. Caspar CG can run properly in windows 8 or 10?? Thanks for your help.
laroca
 
Posts: 15
Joined: 30 Mar 2016, 19:25

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby balte » 01 Mar 2017, 15:51

Hi Iaroca,

that is unfortunately not possible. sdi is still your best bet for multichannel audio output!
CasparCG enthusiast and broadcast geek - Sometimes, I do get payed for this stuff.
User avatar
balte
 
Posts: 264
Joined: 24 Jan 2015, 16:23
Location: The Netherlands, Goeree Overflakkee

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby laroca » 01 Mar 2017, 18:49

Ummm, well, that can be a problem for me, and the win 10 compatibility??
laroca
 
Posts: 15
Joined: 30 Mar 2016, 19:25

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby balte » 03 Mar 2017, 19:20

most people have positive results with Windows 10. windows 8 is out of the question. stability is not guaranteed at all though. it just happens to be mostly stable.
Last edited by balte on 10 Mar 2017, 22:00, edited 1 time in total.
CasparCG enthusiast and broadcast geek - Sometimes, I do get payed for this stuff.
User avatar
balte
 
Posts: 264
Joined: 24 Jan 2015, 16:23
Location: The Netherlands, Goeree Overflakkee

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby laroca » 08 Mar 2017, 13:43

Thanks balte for your help. I going to try and i toll you,
laroca
 
Posts: 15
Joined: 30 Mar 2016, 19:25

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Theo » 20 Mar 2017, 18:19

I already do long multiple clip playouts and this seems to work fine with latest 2.1.0.3394 5422850 Beta 1.
(Running two HD Decklink channels on one i5 Intel system for several weeks...)
Mayor show stopper is however the MIX command and the File recorder. (please see reports Github)
The MIX command causes bad offsync between video and audio, (PLAY 1-1 "my clip" MIX 50)
The File recorder ignores all options.
Regards,
Theo Kooijmans
UniversalDV
User avatar
Theo
 
Posts: 92
Joined: 03 Jun 2012, 10:44
Location: The Netherlands

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby tbimages » 25 Mar 2017, 14:48

Is anyone else having problems with 2.1beta series and NDI output? Working fine with 2.0.7 but not with any of the latest 2.1 builds?
tbimages
 
Posts: 4
Joined: 13 Feb 2017, 16:36

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby Jesper Stærkær » 25 Mar 2017, 15:55

Perhaps this helps you: https://github.com/CasparCG/Server/issu ... -264812046

This is probably fixed in newer versions of Airsend upgrader from Newtek.
Jesper Stærkær
Independent Consultant at SuperFly.tv
User avatar
Jesper Stærkær
 
Posts: 853
Joined: 13 Apr 2010, 18:06
Location: Trondheim, Norway

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby stevespaw » 25 Mar 2017, 19:22

I fixed it this way:
Copy C:\Program Files\NewTek\NewTek NDI AirSend Updater\Processing.AirSend.x64.dll to your "CasparCG folder"

Steve
stevespaw
 
Posts: 76
Joined: 01 Aug 2013, 15:21

Re: CasparCG Server 2.1 status

Postby tbimages » 26 Mar 2017, 21:31

[quote="stevespaw"]I fixed it this way:
Copy C:\Program Files\NewTek\NewTek NDI AirSend Updater\Processing.AirSend.x64.dll to your "CasparCG folder"

Thank you Steve - this fixed it!
tbimages
 
Posts: 4
Joined: 13 Feb 2017, 16:36


Return to Tech and Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 5 guests

cron