Watermark several movies in a loop

Question

4.00/5 (1 vote)

See more:

Hello,

I'm looking for a method/library/or-what-ever to add watermarks to movies.

I have found different software that can do that for me, but it is one movie at a time... I have around 100 home movies that I would like to watermark.

So I, a medium .NET programmer, was thinking: It cannot be that hard to figure out a way to add all the movies to a list and add the watermark to each movie in a loop... Well, it is hard.

After a few hours on Google I have found ffmpeg. Nice little piece of software that could help me.
With ffmpeg I have extracted images of each frame, added the watermark to the images and made a movie again, with the new images.
Works like a charm and the size of the new movies are not even that big and quality is still good (same as original). And I have added 10 movies and my little program does them all automaticly.

My problem is that the above method with ffmpeg is soooooo veeeeeerrrryyyyyy slooowwwwwwwwww. If I see other software that can do only one movie at a time, it's must faster.

So these are my questions:
1. Is there a way to make ffmpeg faster without losing quality?
2. If 1 not possible: Is there software, that I couldn't find, that does what I want? (add several movies and add watermarks to each movie).
3. If not 1 and 2: What do you suggest?
4. (optional :) ) Does anybody have some example code for a faster method?

Thanks in advance!

Posted 2-Mar-11 21:19pm

Ken Elz

Add a Solution

2 solutions

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov · Answer 1 · 2011-03-03T06:16:00

I have a different idea. I would use free VirtualDub http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VirtualDub[^] which I often use. Did you use it? Even if there is no predefined watermarking filter (chances are, you may found one), I think you will be able to develop one for yourself and plug it in. I never tried, but my general positive experience with this software tells me that you have a good chance to succeed.

Would you give it a try?

Good luck,

—SA

Manfred Rudolf Bihy · Answer 2 · 2011-03-02T23:12:00

Solution 1

If you can spare $49 there is a commercial tool found on this page: http://www.videowatermarkfactory.com/order.htm[^] which allows you to operate it in batch mode. You can download a trial version that will work for 15 days, so you can see if it meets your requirements. If the $49 aren't too much and if you'll be doing this on a regular basis you should look into this if it's good enough for you.

Disclaimer:
I never was nor am I in any way affiliated with above mentioned company.

Best Regards,

Manfred

Posted 2-Mar-11 23:12pm

Manfred Rudolf Bihy

Comments

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 3-Mar-11 12:17pm

OP commented:

Thanks for the hint, but I'm Dutch... And Dutch are famous of being cheap Poke tongue | ;-P

No, serious. I want something free. If I can build it, I will (I need to know where start), if there is a free piece of software I will use that.

Ergo: I rather donate the $49 to something else Big Grin | :-D

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 3-Mar-11 12:18pm

Agree with your choice, my 5.
You would waste not just $49 but more. This is risky, because you have no control over source code; and software company never takes responsibility for your problems. Close source code is inherently risky.
--SA