3 ms·
I'm not trying to take the piss here, but why would you use a real-time protocol to stream to an archive? And why SDR instead of a dedicated tuner/decoder?
by akira2501 12y ago
I'm not trying to take the piss here, but why would you use a real-time protocol to stream to an archive? And why SDR instead of a dedicated tuner/decoder?
- akiselev 12y agoWhy wouldn't you? RTMP is one of the most common ways to stream video and if you're already receiving live audio/video data from a tuner then you can easily package it into an RTMP stream going out to any number of archive servers running ffmpeg (which does the hard work of any transcoding or remuxing you need to do). All you have to do is package the RTMP stream, build ffmpeg yourself with nonfree and gpl options enabled, and run/monitor off-the-shelf software with an obnoxious number of command line arguments. Chances are you can package the RTMP stream straight from the source using ffmpeg too. I don't know about the SDR vs tuner question but many SDRs are made with TV tuners and I'd bet you'd have more luck (especially long term) with the software written by the amateur radio community than whatever company makes your brand of TV tuner.
- toomuchtodo 12y agoRTMP is of course not required; you could write locally to your workers, and then push to your storage repo over http, rsync, whatever. My last gig was with video broadcast, so most of my work was with rtmp, Akamai, etc. Different ways to skin the same cat. Almost all hardware video IP encoders support rtmp though, and you can colocate with where your storage is. As /u/akiselev mentioned, SDR is easier to extend with the hobbyist community that exists around it, especially if you have a custom application and need more control.