Questions. Choosing a Cloud Encoder. Jan Ozer. jozer@mindspring.com/

Transcription

1 Choosing a Cloud Encoder Jan Ozer jozer@mindspring.com/ Questions Brought to you by the author of this book. For more information, check out the book Published, April 2013 Caution: cloud encoding is not extensively covered in the book 1

2 Agenda What is cloud encoding How it works Who should switch Choosing a VOD encoder Choosing a live cloud transcoder What is Cloud Computing Someone buys a lot of computers, puts them in a room and rents them to you 2

3 What is Cloud Computing Someone buys a lot of computers, puts them in a room and rents them to you What is Cloud Encoding Someone either: Builds their own encoding center and rents it to you (encoding.com) Or, integrates with cloud computer vendor (Amazon, Azure) and sells service to you High level benefits Lower CAPEX Elastic scalability 3

4 Cloud Encoding Models Points on the continuum Buy Our Software (every app can be a cloud app) Rent your own cloud instances and install our software on them - Sorenson Squeeze Server - (lower capex, limited scalability) Pure SaaS We handle everything and charge by encoding minute or GB throughput - Encoding.com - Amazon.com - Pricing can change with monthly commitment Other Models Elemental: Commit to certain encoding instances Availability (number always on) Maximum number (limits cost at potential cost of throughput) Pricing based on number of nodes and commitment Integrates with appliance-based units (can be used for overflow) 4

5 Other Models Telestream Vantage: You contract directly with Amazon You commit to (for lower pricing) or pay as you go for CPU/GPU resources and the Vantage app Integrates with non-cloud Vantage installation Can be used for overflow or discrete outputs Bottom Line Variety of business models complicates pricing comparisons Multiple variables, including volume, commitments, encoding performance (encoding.com offers turbo and twin-turbo modes) Have to start with very clear view of: Number of files to be encoded (and how quickly) Regularity of demand (and how much you re willing to commit to) Run tests to determine comparative encoding time (which is more complicated than it sounds) 5

6 How s it Work VOD? Just like YouTube (except you get to choose the encoding profiles) So, you upload your files Choose your encoding profiles Encode away Biggest negative Upload time (for local files) Reduced by upload accelerator tools like Aspera You Upload Your Files Most larger sites offer: Direct upload from disc, FTP, HTTP, S3 etc Watch folder support (local, S3, FTP, etc) High speed uploader via Aspera API for automated integrated operation 6

7 Choose Your Presets and Go Presets from Elemental Cloud Identical to appliance based product Live Workflow One signal in Upload to server Transcode to multiple streams In very close to real time Transmux as necessary Distribute 7

8 Key Benefits Live Transcode Traditional benefits Lower CAPEX/Scalability Reduces outbound bandwidth requirements Encode to 11 streams on side, need mbps outbound bandwidth Encode to one stream, need 3-4 mbps outbound bandwidth (or less) Who Should Consider Cloud? Producers/Distributors opening new markets need instant scalability without CAPEX HBO Nordic is a videoon-demand service from HBO for Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland. Could buy new racks of encoders, or go to the cloud 8

9 European Tour Needed Worldwide Scalability Achieved massive new distribution rights Online broadcast in 64 countries without TV broadcast Long form replay broadcast rights in countries with broadcast rights (7 days after airing) Rights to 500 hours of premium content Essentially using Azure infrastructure that Microsoft (and Deltatre) put together for London Olympics For live, sent the feed from the BT broadcast tower to the Azure platform, who delivered encoded streams to CDNs Encoding Lots of Cloud Based Content MTV receives hundreds music videos from many different labels each year Though MTV has their own encoding servers, their workflows were optimized for internal productions Uses Encoding.com to produce videos from record labels Since videos were already being uploaded, the most significant negative of cloud VOD is gone 9

10 Live is Newer Market Best use cases involve Companies with infrequent events with 4+ streams that would require expensive encoder Live transcoding limits CAPEX Companies broadcasting from sites with limited outbound bandwidth Could save having to bring satellite truck in to broadcast event Differentiating the Contenders Integration with existing encoding structure (if necessary) Input/Output Features Encoding controls Output quality Performance 10

11 Integration with Existing Encoding Infrastructure Several cloud encoding products can integrate with existing encoding facilities Sorenson Squeeze Server (installed in the cloud) Telestream Vantage Cloud Elemental Cloud Seamless way to provide scalability to existing system with unified encoding control Input Can the cloud encoding tool access the files where they live Desktop folder(s), FTP, SFTP, Amazon S3, RS Cloud Files, or MS Azure storage locations Amazon Elastic Encoding is from S3 buckets only Does the encoding service offer upload acceleration via: Aspera or similar service Multi-threaded FTP ingest 11

12 Input Can the cloud encoding service input files in the existing format Amazon Elastic Encoding doesn t input ProRes (currently) Don t assume, check for formats like MPEG-TS, ProRes, AvidDNxHD, Red, etc. Output Single file H.264 WebM HEVC (when?) MPEG-2 (for playout servers) Adaptive formats HLS HDS Smooth Caption-related CEA-608 CEA-708 Teletext (and other Euro standards) Sidecar formats SCC SRT DRM packaging DivX/Widevine Playready Flash Access 12

13 Output Delivery options should be as extensive as input Desktop folder(s), FTP, SFTP, Amazon S3, RS Cloud Files, or MS Azure storage locations Syndication integrations YouTube The Platform WordPress Joomla Drupal Interface and API Should match technical capabilities of user Low volume/nontechnical All about UI Some services don t offer UI Encoding.com s is rough in places (e.g. no preset management) But 99% of customers access services via API API check for Documentation Typically XML based Wrappers for other programming languages PHP, Java, Cold Fusion, C# Rich progress reporting 13

14 Encoding Controls Amazon doesn t offer CBR Critical for Adaptive Bitrate (could be wrong here will do some work and report results) Don t assume H.264 Encoding Controls Encoding.com enables access to all x264 controls Elemental very limited Amazon very limited If you re a x264 tweaker, this will be frustrating 14

15 Other Options Encoding Acceleration options Encoding.com lets you choose: 4x core default 8x core turbo 16x core twin turbo To accelerate critical jobs (at a price) Editing functions Trimming Concatenation Can be important for files already uploaded and in the syam Pricing All over the Map Encoding.com Based on GB in and out Volume commitments bring down /GB cost 15

16 Pricing All over the Map Amazon Based on minutes Pricing All over the Map Sorenson Buy Squeeze Server ($5,000) and pay your own Amazon compute charges Vantage Buy encoding functionality from Amazon directly Pricing not yet set 16

17 Pricing Bottom Line Estimate usage in GB/minutes Choose most appropriate plan for each candidate Perform your own pricing estimates Compare Quality Tested Encoding.com, Amazon and Elemental Minimal quality difference 3 different input files Amazon couldn t imput ProRes (used MP4 source) Elemental couldn t handle QDesign audio codec (used ProRes 444) Used ProRes 422 for Encoding.com (standard file) Bottom line Any minor differences in contrast/color could relate to differences in input formats Will standardize and retest before writing review 17

18 Comp 1 Comp 2 18

19 Comp 3 Working Conclusion As with enterprise encoders, quality won t be a major differentiator among major players 19

20 Performance Will be a major differentiator But, tough to get to apples-to-apples comparison with disparate system types Preliminary result (will change +/- 20%) Comparison Issues Different encoding paradigms Elemental is per job By breaking up a single job into two components, can reduce 11 file encoding time to under 20 minutes All encoding.com times in twin turbo mode (will post comparison times in normal mode) Elemental times (and others) will depend upon whether instances are running or need to be spun up (which takes 5 minutes) My comparisons are mixed 20

21 Bottom Line Performance comparisons will take a lot of work Change based upon pricing plans (queue times) Assumptions about instance start up Performance option selected May not be relevant to many users Choosing a Live Transcoder Market much earlier in development Many contenders soon entering the market Will look to publish more on this by early

22 Questions? 22