My work recently involves programmatically making videos. In python, the typical workflow looks something like this:
import subprocess, Image, ImageDraw for i in range(frames_per_second * video_duration_seconds): img = createFrame(i) img.save("%07d.png" % i) subprocess.call(["ffmpeg","-y","-r",str(frames_per_second),"-i", "%07d.png","-vcodec","mpeg4", "-qscale","5", "-r", str(frames_per_second), "video.avi"])
This workflow creates an image for each frame in the video and saves it to disk. After all images have been saved, ffmpeg is called to construct a video from all of the images.
Saving the images to disk (not the creation of the images in memory) consumes the majority of the cycles here, and does not appear to be necessary. Is there some way to perform the same function, but without saving the images to disk? So, ffmpeg would be called and the images would be constructed and fed to ffmpeg immediately after being constructed.
Creating a video slideshow of images with FFmpegFFmpeg is an open source command line tool that can be used to process video, audio, and other multimedia files and streams.
FFmpeg uses string matching to identify and line up the input images — and so it is important that the input images are sequentially numbered. FFmpeg provides support for approximately three different patterns.
Ok I got it working. thanks to LordNeckbeard suggestion to use image2pipe. I had to use jpg encoding instead of png because image2pipe with png doesn't work on my verision of ffmpeg. The first script is essentially the same as your question's code except I implemented a simple image creation that just creates images going from black to red. I also added some code to time the execution.
serial execution
import subprocess, Image fps, duration = 24, 100 for i in range(fps * duration): im = Image.new("RGB", (300, 300), (i, 1, 1)) im.save("%07d.jpg" % i) subprocess.call(["ffmpeg","-y","-r",str(fps),"-i", "%07d.jpg","-vcodec","mpeg4", "-qscale","5", "-r", str(fps), "video.avi"])
parallel execution (with no images saved to disk)
import Image from subprocess import Popen, PIPE fps, duration = 24, 100 p = Popen(['ffmpeg', '-y', '-f', 'image2pipe', '-vcodec', 'mjpeg', '-r', '24', '-i', '-', '-vcodec', 'mpeg4', '-qscale', '5', '-r', '24', 'video.avi'], stdin=PIPE) for i in range(fps * duration): im = Image.new("RGB", (300, 300), (i, 1, 1)) im.save(p.stdin, 'JPEG') p.stdin.close() p.wait()
the results are interesting, I ran each script 3 times to compare performance: serial:
12.9062321186 12.8965060711 12.9360799789
parallel:
8.67797684669 8.57139396667 8.38926696777
So it seems the parallel version is faster about 1.5 times faster.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With