How to Save Videos from TV News Websites

On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 21:38:47 -0500, wrote:

I'm trying to save a few videos from a TV station's website. Using XP
and Firefox (older version, 17). I have several video download
extensions installed, which work fine on Youtube, but not on these
videos. I also tried to use IE and K-Meleon. I then installed the FF
extension "Cache Viewer". Using that, I could not find the videos in
cache. I also saved the entire cache, and went thru all 200+ folders
within it, manually. The videos simply do not exist.

Where are they saved on my drive when I view them???????

More importantly, is there some program I can install which will capture
and save ANY video, regardless of it's source on the web?
(Must run on XP, and preferably be free).

Thanks

It occurred to me to google the problem with my RealPlayer, and indeed t
there is a plug-in to make Real work with FF, and it may be missing.

For some reason someone asked about this in the malwarebytes forum, and
since I just ran MBAM a week ago and quaranteened 150 things, I thought
I'd read it. The first reply is by our own David Lipman.
https://forums.malwarebytes.org/inde...in-firefox-22/
Well, unless you run MBAM this link won't help you because they end up
recommending anohter program altogether. VLC. The OP of this url
probably wants to play llinks, not record them, and certainly not links
with only windows,

Come to think of it, I'm the one with trouble. Maybe yours works, or
maybe you don't have Real installed and it will work.

This could be valuable for me.

The plug-in checker https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/plugincheck/ says I
have all of these, but the status of all of them is "unknown 1.3.1.2".
I don't know what the numbers mean.

RealDownloader PluginRealDownloader Plugin

RealNetworks(tm) RealDownloader HTML5VideoShim Plug-In (32-bit)
RealNetworks(tm) RealDownloader HTML5VideoShim Plug-In

RealNetworks(tm) RealDownloader PepperFlashVideoShim Plug-In (32-bit)
RealNetworks(tm) RealDownloader PepperFlashVideoShim Plug-In

RealNetworks(tm) RealDownloader Chrome Background Extension Plug-In
(32-bit) RealNetworks(tm) RealDownloader Chrome Background Extension
Plug-In

RealPlayer Download PluginRealPlayer Download Plugin

Anyhow, this is enough time spent for me until you try to use Real AND
it doesn't work. It probably will and it's perfect.

Paul wrote:
wrote:
I'm trying to save a few videos from a TV station's website. Using XP
and Firefox (older version, 17). I have several video download
extensions installed, which work fine on Youtube, but not on these
videos. I also tried to use IE and K-Meleon. I then installed the FF
extension "Cache Viewer". Using that, I could not find the videos in
cache. I also saved the entire cache, and went thru all 200+ folders
within it, manually. The videos simply do not exist.

Where are they saved on my drive when I view them???????

More importantly, is there some program I can install which will capture
and save ANY video, regardless of it's source on the web?
(Must run on XP, and preferably be free).

Thanks


I found another toy in the screen capture side
of things (rather than doing it right and just
snagging the video file itself)...

http://www.ghacks.net/2011/07/25/cap...i-afterburner/

It's MSI Afterburner, and the reviewer in that article,
claims it is almost as good as FRAPS. The only negative
it got, is not supporting a whole pile of CODECS. And
really, what I want in a capture facility, is just to
get the damn thing to capture the video. Fancy CODECS
can wait for later, in post-processing.

I expect it's going to take a good long while
to get a test environment set up. The funny part,
is the manual doesn't show the screen capture option.
Like it exists in an older version or something.

Paul

I have some good news and some bad news. The bad news first.

When I try to capture Flash video with MSI Afterburner,
I get an "orange" frame and the duration of the captured
video is zero seconds. It's like the interface is blocked.

Now, when I play a movie in VLC (which of course, nobody
would ever care about), the Afterburner works great. The
Afterburner package comes in two pieces. And it's a
RivaTuner server software which has the video capture
engine in it. If you install that portion at install time,
then the video capture option appears in settings.

I cranked all the knobs as far as they would go. I disabled
the frame rate limit. I set the resolution to 16:10 900p
for my 1440x900 monitor. So I could capture the whole screen.
With a CODEC of "none" selected, no compression on the fly,
it would capture data at 250MB/sec. Later, doing properties
on the movie, it said the frame rate was 120.0 frames per second.
Maybe it's recording in 4:2:2 mode or something.

The deal remains as it always has. Video cards have multiple
render planes. The 2D desktop is one thing to be captured.
The 3D surface that games render in, is a separate surface.
There is the annotation plane (original movie surface) and
also VMR7/VMR9 surfaces for movies. FRAPs was claimed to
handle three surfaces when it came out, but with Flash
gaining hardware acceleration after the introduction of
FRAPS, who knows where Flash puts its stuff. And with
PVP (protected video path) capabilities, I think even
portions of GPU memory can be made off-limits. All
in the name of DRM.

So if you put several hard drives in RAID0, and your
movie is not playing in Flash, you might get lucky and
be able to capture it at 250MB/sec. Which is better than
the performance of CamStudio. My idea was, to find a platform
without a compressing CODEC in the path, to see if a decent
sink rate for storage, would allow a higher frame rate.
And the MSI Afterburner did that for me. But FRAPS might
still have it beat, depending on what surfaces FRAPS can
now capture.

Maybe someone else can test FRAPS for me :-) That's enough
testing for now. The trial of FRAPS will collect video
for 30 seconds, which should be sufficient to see whether
it's a worthwhile product.

Paul

Hot-Text wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message
...
In message , Hot-Text
writes:
"Paul" wrote in message
...
Henry wrote:
CamStudio will capture just about anything.
When I tested CamStudio, I got an effective frame rate of
7FPS. It may collect "keyframes" at 200Hz, but frames of
Paul
Uncheck
Auto Adjust
Then setup
Compressor
CamStudio Lossless Codec v1.0
Quality 100
Set Key Frames Every 200 frames
Framerates
Capture Frame Every 5 millisecond
Playback Rate 200 frames/second
Check ok

200 FPS - what are you doing, ballistics analysis or something?
Doesn't that produce huge files (even if a lot of the frames _are_
identical)? Certainly, for news "footage", I doubt it will be more
than 25 frames/50 fields (or 30/60): these days of Skype, 'phones, and
general compression, possibly a lot less. I doubt there's much
material _anywhere_ that uses over 100 FPS, even at
HD/UHD/whatever'snext; certainly for news, it's likely to be a lot
less than that.

Setup Cam To:
Region

Recode say video side it 360 px x 360 px



(Or is it that 200 is the only rate CamStudio does?)

No
but I gave you to best
rate for CamStudio
using the Region to Recode the video side

But you can set it to 1 FPS
If you like



I set CamStudio 2.7 to Auto Adjust, and the movie
statistics say 20FPS, while the captured rate (while
it was recording), said 15FPS. In the movie itself, this
is the evidence. Each line below, is one frame from the
movie. Notice that the checksum of some adjacent frames
are the same. So the adaptation is "weird", insisting
on keeping the recording rate, slightly slower than the
rate recorded in the video header. This was a region
about 800x400 or so.

95dd67982dee6f1af4a87466f5d2fd2455a4e784 k01966.jpeg x
95dd67982dee6f1af4a87466f5d2fd2455a4e784 k01967.jpeg x
ceae508628e9910c3a2ca63a4414a564c8dcc8d7 k01968.jpeg
7214fd1f4b9ec639a7440880d9161503943ea5df k01969.jpeg
7223fd9358b03f0c5169db644ce86dfce1e1bc89 k01970.jpeg
307643e61eae494ab5a719a9c17d2e2a40b27079 k01971.jpeg x
307643e61eae494ab5a719a9c17d2e2a40b27079 k01972.jpeg x
a29ef9f68d8c203b91fae69b8e6da1738abada08 k01973.jpeg
45aa8c5a6a2dfa44eed8845e538009cb841730fe k01974.jpeg
ada80324883f53da693e30e8993d4e68382e69ff k01975.jpeg x
ada80324883f53da693e30e8993d4e68382e69ff k01976.jpeg x
c1be0a2cb203514fb04b157ec43a921e596435c7 k01977.jpeg
69d3a4544b0b06f985e91ad28db01206177ff736 k01978.jpeg
9a2b516eb7a5e7c941bf6bab2e768970f2851bb0 k01979.jpeg
7f1d0c416f43a2aebde0ea76b99358b13ccdfbbf k01980.jpeg x
7f1d0c416f43a2aebde0ea76b99358b13ccdfbbf k01981.jpeg x
55ea1703616967161feb6460a5352201d61c36d5 k01982.jpeg
c61ca455c3a0189c91f5b67933e5b9f6b3bfbfc7 k01983.jpeg
703498313294f9a7a7aee1f9cb15bf1b6ddef2bf k01984.jpeg x
703498313294f9a7a7aee1f9cb15bf1b6ddef2bf k01985.jpeg x
a1bd9085d33758eea66faf21779fafcecc1b841d k01986.jpeg
0459e1a6dcb618c0701aa98ace0bc66cda3f65cb k01987.jpeg
9d0acfe3151843222f81d540f9df9fe81a602659 k01988.jpeg
c5341fb7b65bb537532776a9058a8f563567d66b k01989.jpeg
f9edb9b73e950b819b9cb51582c91fc514ba1466 sha1suma.exe
1a5bbe5176dfffae3ea17a4fe431e88f41435f25 sums.txt

The lines with the "X" at the end, are duplicated
frame. Which ideally should be removed (somehow).

That was captured on my new computer, using Lagarith
Lossless CODEC set to "multithreaded". What I'd like
to try as a test, is no codec at all (raw recording),
but that is not an option.

And the CamStudio FAQ reports the same issue with
video card surfaces. I had to change the rendering plane
in VLC, in order to record the video at all.

I played a Flash video in a browser, and CamStudio
*did* manage to record the video. It also recorded the
mouse cursor, and Task Manager when that popped in
front of the window. The recorded frame rate while
viewing the Flash video was only 13.9FPS or so. So
still not fast enough to make good copies.

Paul

"Paul" wrote in message
...
Paul wrote:
wrote:
I'm trying to save a few videos from a TV station's website. Using XP
and Firefox (older version, 17). I have several video download
extensions installed, which work fine on Youtube, but not on these
videos. I also tried to use IE and K-Meleon. I then installed the FF
extension "Cache Viewer". Using that, I could not find the videos in
cache. I also saved the entire cache, and went thru all 200+ folders
within it, manually. The videos simply do not exist.

Where are they saved on my drive when I view them???????

More importantly, is there some program I can install which will capture
and save ANY video, regardless of it's source on the web?
(Must run on XP, and preferably be free).

Thanks


I found another toy in the screen capture side
of things (rather than doing it right and just
snagging the video file itself)...

http://www.ghacks.net/2011/07/25/cap...i-afterburner/

It's MSI Afterburner, and the reviewer in that article,
claims it is almost as good as FRAPS. The only negative
it got, is not supporting a whole pile of CODECS. And
really, what I want in a capture facility, is just to
get the damn thing to capture the video. Fancy CODECS
can wait for later, in post-processing.

I expect it's going to take a good long while
to get a test environment set up. The funny part,
is the manual doesn't show the screen capture option.
Like it exists in an older version or something.

Paul

I have some good news and some bad news. The bad news first.

When I try to capture Flash video with MSI Afterburner,
I get an "orange" frame and the duration of the captured
video is zero seconds. It's like the interface is blocked.

Now, when I play a movie in VLC (which of course, nobody
would ever care about), the Afterburner works great. The
Afterburner package comes in two pieces. And it's a
RivaTuner server software which has the video capture
engine in it. If you install that portion at install time,
then the video capture option appears in settings.

I cranked all the knobs as far as they would go. I disabled
the frame rate limit. I set the resolution to 16:10 900p
for my 1440x900 monitor. So I could capture the whole screen.
With a CODEC of "none" selected, no compression on the fly,
it would capture data at 250MB/sec. Later, doing properties
on the movie, it said the frame rate was 120.0 frames per second.
Maybe it's recording in 4:2:2 mode or something.

The deal remains as it always has. Video cards have multiple
render planes. The 2D desktop is one thing to be captured.
The 3D surface that games render in, is a separate surface.
There is the annotation plane (original movie surface) and
also VMR7/VMR9 surfaces for movies. FRAPs was claimed to
handle three surfaces when it came out, but with Flash
gaining hardware acceleration after the introduction of
FRAPS, who knows where Flash puts its stuff. And with
PVP (protected video path) capabilities, I think even
portions of GPU memory can be made off-limits. All
in the name of DRM.

So if you put several hard drives in RAID0, and your
movie is not playing in Flash, you might get lucky and
be able to capture it at 250MB/sec. Which is better than
the performance of CamStudio. My idea was, to find a platform
without a compressing CODEC in the path, to see if a decent
sink rate for storage, would allow a higher frame rate.
And the MSI Afterburner did that for me. But FRAPS might
still have it beat, depending on what surfaces FRAPS can
now capture.

Maybe someone else can test FRAPS for me :-) That's enough
testing for now. The trial of FRAPS will collect video
for 30 seconds, which should be sufficient to see whether
it's a worthwhile product.

Paul


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OENfCDVOKE ?

Hot-Text wrote:


"Paul" wrote in message
...
Paul wrote:
wrote:
I'm trying to save a few videos from a TV station's website. Using XP
and Firefox (older version, 17). I have several video download
extensions installed, which work fine on Youtube, but not on these
videos. I also tried to use IE and K-Meleon. I then installed the FF
extension "Cache Viewer". Using that, I could not find the videos in
cache. I also saved the entire cache, and went thru all 200+ folders
within it, manually. The videos simply do not exist.

Where are they saved on my drive when I view them???????

More importantly, is there some program I can install which will
capture
and save ANY video, regardless of it's source on the web?
(Must run on XP, and preferably be free).

Thanks


I found another toy in the screen capture side
of things (rather than doing it right and just
snagging the video file itself)...

http://www.ghacks.net/2011/07/25/cap...i-afterburner/

It's MSI Afterburner, and the reviewer in that article,
claims it is almost as good as FRAPS. The only negative
it got, is not supporting a whole pile of CODECS. And
really, what I want in a capture facility, is just to
get the damn thing to capture the video. Fancy CODECS
can wait for later, in post-processing.

I expect it's going to take a good long while
to get a test environment set up. The funny part,
is the manual doesn't show the screen capture option.
Like it exists in an older version or something.

Paul

I have some good news and some bad news. The bad news first.

When I try to capture Flash video with MSI Afterburner,
I get an "orange" frame and the duration of the captured
video is zero seconds. It's like the interface is blocked.

Now, when I play a movie in VLC (which of course, nobody
would ever care about), the Afterburner works great. The
Afterburner package comes in two pieces. And it's a
RivaTuner server software which has the video capture
engine in it. If you install that portion at install time,
then the video capture option appears in settings.

I cranked all the knobs as far as they would go. I disabled
the frame rate limit. I set the resolution to 16:10 900p
for my 1440x900 monitor. So I could capture the whole screen.
With a CODEC of "none" selected, no compression on the fly,
it would capture data at 250MB/sec. Later, doing properties
on the movie, it said the frame rate was 120.0 frames per second.
Maybe it's recording in 4:2:2 mode or something.

The deal remains as it always has. Video cards have multiple
render planes. The 2D desktop is one thing to be captured.
The 3D surface that games render in, is a separate surface.
There is the annotation plane (original movie surface) and
also VMR7/VMR9 surfaces for movies. FRAPs was claimed to
handle three surfaces when it came out, but with Flash
gaining hardware acceleration after the introduction of
FRAPS, who knows where Flash puts its stuff. And with
PVP (protected video path) capabilities, I think even
portions of GPU memory can be made off-limits. All
in the name of DRM.

So if you put several hard drives in RAID0, and your
movie is not playing in Flash, you might get lucky and
be able to capture it at 250MB/sec. Which is better than
the performance of CamStudio. My idea was, to find a platform
without a compressing CODEC in the path, to see if a decent
sink rate for storage, would allow a higher frame rate.
And the MSI Afterburner did that for me. But FRAPS might
still have it beat, depending on what surfaces FRAPS can
now capture.

Maybe someone else can test FRAPS for me :-) That's enough
testing for now. The trial of FRAPS will collect video
for 30 seconds, which should be sufficient to see whether
it's a worthwhile product.

Paul


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OENfCDVOKE ?

There's one more trick to it than is in the video.

You can use the Auto Adjust, but first you unlock the
settings and pretend to set a high manual frame rate. And then
the Auto Adjust will record with respect to that high
frame rate. For example, if I load 60FPS into the manual
setting, then lock the setting by ticking the Auto Adjust,
I can get 32FPS.

One thing I've having problems with, is I was using the
Intel IYUV CODEC. Which as far as I know, doesn't do
compression. On one machine running WinXP, that's where
I get 32-33FPS of actual captured framerate (video
claims it is recorded 60FPS, but only 33 unique frames
are captured per second). On the other machine running
WinXP, CamStudio crashes, implying there is something
wrong with the IYUV codec. I've applied KB977914 to the
affected machine, and that didn't help. And as far as
I know, on the working machine, that's the only security
patch that changed the IYUV_32.dll file.

And rather than construct a RAID array to capture
the data, I'm capturing to a RAM Drive. That gives
me a 4GB place to store video captures, and it's where
I tested and got one program to capture at 250MB/sec
(16 seconds worth). That's to ensure, if not using a
video compression codec, that the disk doesn't hold
back the test results. For practical video recording
(after all these tuning tests are finished), I'd have
to look at the capture datarate, and put together
the right hardware to match the rate. The
best I could do here, is four hard drives in RAID0.

Paul

"Paul" wrote in message
...
Hot-Text wrote:
"Paul" wrote in message
...
Paul wrote:
wrote:
I'm trying to save a few videos from a TV station's website. Using XP
and Firefox (older version, 17). I have several video download
extensions installed, which work fine on Youtube, but not on these
videos. I also tried to use IE and K-Meleon. I then installed the FF
extension "Cache Viewer". Using that, I could not find the videos in
cache. I also saved the entire cache, and went thru all 200+ folders
within it, manually. The videos simply do not exist.
Where are they saved on my drive when I view them???????
More importantly, is there some program I can install which will
capture
and save ANY video, regardless of it's source on the web?
(Must run on XP, and preferably be free).
Thanks
I found another toy in the screen capture side
of things (rather than doing it right and just
snagging the video file itself)...

http://www.ghacks.net/2011/07/25/cap...i-afterburner/

It's MSI Afterburner, and the reviewer in that article,
claims it is almost as good as FRAPS.
CUT OUT

Paul http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OENfCDVOKE ?

There's one more trick to it than is in the video.

You can use the Auto Adjust, but first you unlock the
settings and pretend to set a high manual frame rate. And then
the Auto Adjust will record with respect to that high
frame rate. For example, if I load 60FPS into the manual
setting, then lock the setting by ticking the Auto Adjust,
I can get 32FPS.

One thing I've having problems with, is I was using the
Intel IYUV CODEC.

IYUV is Raw Image
with Raw Audio

1/4 Size of Screen resolution
15 min just Over a 10 Gb

Which as far as I know, doesn't do
compression. On one machine running WinXP, that's where
I get 32-33FPS of actual captured framerate (video
claims it is recorded 60FPS, but only 33 unique frames
are captured per second). On the other machine running
WinXP, CamStudio crashes, implying there is something
wrong with the IYUV codec. I've applied KB977914 to the
affected machine, and that didn't help. And as far as
I know, on the working machine, that's the only security
patch that changed the IYUV_32.dll file.


CamStudio crashes
Need a Big Tamp
For IYUV with Audio

Test 5 min with out Audio
and you seen how big it is


And rather than construct a RAID array to capture
the data, I'm capturing to a RAM Drive. That gives
me a 4GB place to store video captures, and it's where
I tested and got one program to capture at 250MB/sec
(16 seconds worth). That's to ensure, if not using a
video compression codec, that the disk doesn't hold
back the test results. For practical video recording
(after all these tuning tests are finished), I'd have
to look at the capture datarate, and put together
the right hardware to match the rate. The
best I could do here, is four hard drives in RAID0.

Hot-Text wrote:
"Paul" wrote in message
...
Hot-Text wrote:
"Paul" wrote in message
...
Paul wrote:
wrote:
I'm trying to save a few videos from a TV station's website.
Using XP
and Firefox (older version, 17). I have several video download
extensions installed, which work fine on Youtube, but not on these
videos. I also tried to use IE and K-Meleon. I then installed
the FF
extension "Cache Viewer". Using that, I could not find the videos in
cache. I also saved the entire cache, and went thru all 200+ folders
within it, manually. The videos simply do not exist.
Where are they saved on my drive when I view them???????
More importantly, is there some program I can install which will
capture
and save ANY video, regardless of it's source on the web?
(Must run on XP, and preferably be free).
Thanks
I found another toy in the screen capture side
of things (rather than doing it right and just
snagging the video file itself)...

http://www.ghacks.net/2011/07/25/cap...i-afterburner/

It's MSI Afterburner, and the reviewer in that article,
claims it is almost as good as FRAPS.
CUT OUT

Paul http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OENfCDVOKE ?

There's one more trick to it than is in the video.

You can use the Auto Adjust, but first you unlock the
settings and pretend to set a high manual frame rate. And then
the Auto Adjust will record with respect to that high
frame rate. For example, if I load 60FPS into the manual
setting, then lock the setting by ticking the Auto Adjust,
I can get 32FPS.

One thing I've having problems with, is I was using the
Intel IYUV CODEC.

IYUV is Raw Image
with Raw Audio

1/4 Size of Screen resolution
15 min just Over a 10 Gb

Which as far as I know, doesn't do
compression. On one machine running WinXP, that's where
I get 32-33FPS of actual captured framerate (video
claims it is recorded 60FPS, but only 33 unique frames
are captured per second). On the other machine running
WinXP, CamStudio crashes, implying there is something
wrong with the IYUV codec. I've applied KB977914 to the
affected machine, and that didn't help. And as far as
I know, on the working machine, that's the only security
patch that changed the IYUV_32.dll file.


CamStudio crashes
Need a Big Tamp
For IYUV with Audio

Test 5 min with out Audio
and you seen how big it is


And rather than construct a RAID array to capture
the data, I'm capturing to a RAM Drive. That gives
me a 4GB place to store video captures, and it's where
I tested and got one program to capture at 250MB/sec
(16 seconds worth). That's to ensure, if not using a
video compression codec, that the disk doesn't hold
back the test results. For practical video recording
(after all these tuning tests are finished), I'd have
to look at the capture datarate, and put together
the right hardware to match the rate. The
best I could do here, is four hard drives in RAID0.


It's worse than that. A bit more testing, shows CamStudio
still has a 4GB limit and doesn't have AVI2 capabilities.

I've been able to get real capture rates as high as 60FPS,
but it's not going to do any good if the output file is
corrupted and unusable.

Paul

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 22:20:12 -0400, in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general, micky ,
wrote

On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:52:29 -0400, micky
wrote:

P&M

You don't mention Real Player.

For that matter, you can listen to muic or whatever with Real Player and
keep it running, and whenever there is a video window in a webbrowser,
at least Firefox, the Real logo will be there already. Just click or
right click and it starts recording. It couldnt' be better.

Well, Real could be better because it has no drop down menus and I can
never find anything, but the part where it record from off the web
couldn't be. Oh, I found it. I have version 16.0.1.18,

To check it out again, I went to the trusty funeral home page, first
time in years, and they've made the video screen full screen, about 10
times as large as it was (although the camera is so far away ou still
can't see the speaker's face) , and it may have forced off the real
logo, although I don't know how.

OKAY I WENT TO YOUTUBE AND DIDN'T SEE IT THERE EITHER.

ANY CHANCE THEY GOT RID OF THE FEATURE AND UPDATED ME WHEN I WASN'T
LOOKING?

Maybe I was supposed to start Real before starting FF? I haven't got
time to check on all the possibiities. But I would do that.


IIRC , it was release 14. Best video recorder i ever had but realplayer
had other "issues", though i wish i had trimmed its attempt to take over
everything and saved it for the video copy function only.
(yes, it would copy anything from any source that came across your video
card)

jim

I would ask more people about this, and if necessary go to
www.oldverion.com and download every old version in the last 2 or 5
years to find the one which did this. I'd also read Real's descrition
of what enhancmeents each version brought.

I can see why some other people din't like Real's ability to record, but
in this environment, I don't see Real caring much.

It was, and probably is still, perfect.

I had stopped using that, but when I
dl'd a new version a year or two ago, it would record anything I played.
Even video that a local funeral home provided online, but no way to
record.

It shows the Real logo right next to the window in which the video is
playing, iirc. But wherever it is, you click on it, or right click,
and it will record. I had no trouble finding the file. I probably set
where it should be in Real's settings, and it stores them one at a time,
no hunting through a cache. .

"Paul" wrote in message
...
Hot-Text wrote:
"Paul" wrote in message

It's worse than that. A bit more testing, shows CamStudio
still has a 4GB limit and doesn't have AVI2 capabilities.

AVI 2 work as capabilities in my Windows 98
But not on my XP

As for the 4GB limit
I set my to a 12 Gb

But did not log how I did it

I've been able to get real capture rates as high as 60FPS,
but it's not going to do any good if the output file is
corrupted and unusable.



real capture rates
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=CHX-ArCTCD8

wrote:
I'm trying to save a few videos from a TV station's website. Using XP
and Firefox (older version, 17). I have several video download
extensions installed, which work fine on Youtube, but not on these
videos. I also tried to use IE and K-Meleon. I then installed the FF
extension "Cache Viewer". Using that, I could not find the videos in
cache. I also saved the entire cache, and went thru all 200+ folders
within it, manually. The videos simply do not exist.

Where are they saved on my drive when I view them???????

More importantly, is there some program I can install which will capture
and save ANY video, regardless of it's source on the web?
(Must run on XP, and preferably be free).

Thanks


It's been a while, but this is quick update on
screen capture.

I was pushing Camstudio as a solution for capturing video.
It has a GUI, which makes it easy to use, but one disadvantage
it has, is the AVI output file cannot go past 4GB. It gets
corrupted, because they still haven't put OpenDML AVI2
output capability in there.

I was going to get the source for Camstudio, and see
if it could be modified in some way, to get past 4GB
(like, use OpenDML AVI2 for output, instead of original
flavor AVI).

I got the source OK. It needs Visual Studio to compile the C++.

I got myself a copy of Visual Studio Express. I could not
register it with Microsoft (you have 30 days to get a free
registration key from Microsoft). They leave the download sitting
there, but the registration server is dead.

OK, so I'm on the 30 day clock, trying to compile, and Express doesn't
support ATL/MFC. Only the $500 version of the software supports that.
There is a way to set up a 64 bit ATL/MFC library, but no 32 bit library.
There are no build targets for 64 bits in CamStudio, and my current OS
is 32 bit anyway (makes testing difficult). It would be an exercise in
frustration to get the project to compile with Express. Several other
projects I've downloaded since then, also have an MFC dependency.
Having a copy of Express, is a waste of time. I wasted a lot of
days figuring that out.

*******

I had a few things to do around the house, so had to put down this
project for a week.

I started looking for another solution. And spotted a reference to
ffmpeg (which is an open source library for doing all sorts of things
with movies).

You can get a copy of a Windows build of FFMPEG here. I used a
Zeranoe build years ago, so recognized the name. FFMPEG is better
than it used to be. Less creaky.

http://ffmpeg.zeranoe.com/builds/

Latest Zeranoe FFmpeg Build Version: git-f6bb2cd (2014-10-16)
32-bit Downloads --- 64-bit Downloads

Download FFmpeg git-f6bb2cd 32-bit Static --- all in one FFMPEG.exe

From Command Prompt, run this command, to get the "Name" of your sound card.

ffmpeg -list_devices true -f dshow -i dummy

From Command Prompt, check the Sound card has a Capture pin. Substitute
the name of your sound card, as determined from the previous command.

ffmpeg -f dshow -list_options true -i audio="SoundMAX HD Audio"

Important - if your sound card has a custom control panel, look
in the recording section for "Stereo Mix" or "What you hear"
or equivalent. Tick the box to make this the exclusive
recording source, and lift the slider to 100% (so you can be
sure to get some sound). On other OSes, there are various hacks
to get around underhanded Microsoft attempts to hide "What you
hear". Later Windows OSes sport things like PVP or protected video
path, and with the limitations that imposes, I wouldn't waste my
time testing this method on anything other than WinXP :-)

OK, now the test case.

1) Run a Flash Video. Right-click to bring up the tiny Flash control
panel in the video pane. Turn off Hardware Acceleration. This is so
the Flash video renders in a plane that GDI/BitBLT operations can
capture. If you don't do this, a "black box" results.

2) In Command Prompt, start the command to capture video and audio.
All of this should be entered on one line in Command Prompt. Substitute
the name of your Sound Card, in the appropriate part of the command.
You can turn the framerate down if you like. I've been leaving it
at 60, to see just how much the computer can take :-)

ffmpeg -offset_x 0 -offset_y 480 -video_size 720x480 -framerate 60
-f gdigrab -i desktop -f dshow -sample_rate 44100 -i audio="SoundMAX HD Audio"
-vcodec mjpeg -acodec pbm_s16le out.avi

3) Let the command run for five seconds or so, until it settles down.
Now, start the video playing in your browser, the one you want to
capture. (Align the playback window with the lower left corner of
your screen.) You can adjust the offsets or the video_size as you see
fit. On my particular LCD screen, I was aiming for the lower_left
corner as "home" for the capture.

The command I crafted is not the best. It's the first thing I got running.
It took *all day* to get this far. FFMPEG has a ton of options.

What was really amazing, is the very first command I tried, could
record my full screen (1280x1024) at 60FPS. But the output format was
MPEG. And that upsets the color (some color fringing is present). By
switching to MJPEG, there is still color fringing, but it is not nearly as bad.
The closer you get to lossless compression (like huffyuv), the harder
your CPU has to work. Running HuffYUV I could only manage 50FPS flat out.

The above command managed 60FPS, so it still captures at a good rate.

*******

This was the very first command I tried, from the documentation page.

ffmpeg -framerate 60 -f gdigrab -i desktop out.mpg

( http://www.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg-devices.html )

The framerate displayed in the Command Prompt window, is higher than
60 FPS, so I don't know why it is doing that. But what is impressive,
is the small size - the output file is tiny (at least, until you
feed it a real video to record).

If you record at 60FPS, as I did in that example, play the video
back in VLC to have it render properly. You'll get macroblocks if
you allow WMP (Windows Media Player) to play it. I expect if
I turn down the framerate, WMP will like it again.

I haven't experimented yet, with post-processing, to see if
there are any more problems awaiting me. (Like a bad AVI file
in a movie editor.)

The sampling jitter seems to be pretty bad. I collected
video at 60FPS, while playing an Adobe Flash video at
24FPS. There should be a unique frame every 2.5 frame times.
Yet the sampled stream shows unique frames with as low a
spacing as 1 frame and as high a spacing as 5 frames. Which
means the screen capture is not going at a constant rate like
it should. If hardware was doing the sampling, you might
see a range of 2 to 3 replicated frames in the trace.

*******

I originally started the experiment, to see if I could record
video to separate image files. If you want to capture your
screen, 60 times a second at 5MB of *.bmp per capture or
300MB/sec, you can try this. I tested this on my (software)
RAMDisk, and it did a video-only capture just fine. These
individual frames, is how I figure out the sampling
jitter. Run checksums on the entire set of .bmp files
(a couple thousand), and see how many frames are the same
as one another. The %05d here means out00000.bmp, out00001.bmp
and so on, for output files. One file per frame. You cannot
capture sound very well this way, so this cannot be a
"final solution" in any case.

ffmpeg -framerate 60 -f gdigrab -i desktop out%05d.bmp

Once you have a collection of frames, one of the free
video editors (VirtualDub? or Avidemux?) has the ability
to deal with individual frames. So you can "glue" a set of
images back together, to make a movie. My little RAMDisk
can easily handle 300MB/sec, but it rapidly runs out of
space. I can't "steal Hollywood movies" that way, as
two hours of capture would take a boatload of RAM, at
300MB/sec. That's why the alternative out.mpg command is so
attractive (even if the colors are all screwed up).

I guarantee you'll have hours of fun playing with this.
I spent the whole day on it :-) It's crude, but it's
doing better than CamStudio in some ways.

HTH,
Paul