Thank you so much for your help and for all of the useful information! As I was writing, the thought momentarily occurred to me, that perhaps the issue related to the audio, but then the thought disappeared. Perhaps because of my inexperience.
I have added the silent audio stream, as recommended, and the video preview manifested correctly in the YouTube live console. This worked both with the original framerate configuration, and with the changes you recommended. Even though in both cases YouTube complains that it is not receiving sufficient video, and that the bitrate is lower than recommended, the final output stream, so far, is holding online. For my configuration, at least at this stage, the most important factor is stability of the stream. Occasional buffering, or degradation of image quality is perfectly acceptable. I believe the rationale for the setup of the original solution which I linked to is most likely optimization for processing power and memory, which is important for me as well. I am running one virtual processor with half a gigabyte of memory. In the more minimal configuration, processor usage seems to be stable at about one quarter capacity, and memory at about one fifth capacity. With a higher framerate setup, it is pushing the maximum ceiling of one hundred percent. Yes, real motion video, perhaps for a future project. :) A further interest of mine is how many lightweight streams of this kind I can run from a single server, using multithreading, or parallel processes, if that is even possible, which is another reason resource optimization is a factor. But first, this would be the foundation, and I would have to do further thinking, reading, and possibly asking before that point. Thank you once again! -- Sent from: http://www.ffmpeg-archive.org/ _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
