We're having a problem with webcam publishing taking very long to clear the client buffer. Our flash player is using a modified form of the web cam recorder example given with the Wowza installation. The quality is still set to camera.SetQuality(0, 88). We've played with these numbers (plus the buffering setting) and can occasionally hit it where our testers are all pleased with the results, but eventually something changes and the video becomes pixelated or the video becomes jerky. So we're back to (0, 88) and things are fine. This afternoon though, I recorded a 40 second video that began filling the buffer immediately, so that at 40 seconds, there were 20 seconds of buffer filled. It then took almost 60 seconds to unload the buffer before receiving the
NetStream.Unpublish.Success status and unpublishing.
My frustration is that I can't seem to tune these settings so that everyone is happy. Our client bandwidth seems to be fairly decent (outbound speeds range from 350 Kb/s to 500 Kb/s). Mine is at 415 Kb/s and I just don't get why the buffer fills and takes so long to unload.
When I analyze the stats on the published file, the datarate seems to be 410 Kb/s or so. I've read the manuals and am struggling to keep all our testers happy with the results. Is such a delay in unloading the buffer normal? Maybe I should just accept it and move on... :confused:
I really don't know. I think all you can do is use the provided API with the force flag to true and see what happens. I have not found any other secret APIs or methods for gaining better control of the encoder settings.
You may want to double check to see if the video being recorded is really 320x240. It might be better to do:
camera.setMode(320, 240, 20, true);
which I believe will try to force the frame size to 320x240. This may have been what is causing the bitrate to jump. By forcing the bitrate down it probably just kept the frame size larger and lower frame rate.
All of this camera setting stuff seems to differ based on the camera and driver on the local machine. It is tough to get right.
And yes we did not see a huge difference in quality settings between 88-95. We did see problem above 95.