We are currently testing a new feature that generates HDR (H.265 10-bit, HLG or PG) video, and uploads using the YouTube-v3 data api. When a file is uploaded via the videos/insert API, it does not show it has having "HD" quality, but if I save the file and upload via the YouTube.com creator website, that same video will show the "HD" quality symbol. Is this a bug or something I may be missing (couldn't find anything in the API)?
Actually rechecked and it’s ok. Just doesn’t show HDR indication in Safari. Thanks for the response
Related
I want to only allow images that are taken directly with the phone’s camera on my website. Are there any APIs or tricks that could help me tell if an image is authentic and taken with an iPhone or Android camera a few moments ago and not taken from Google Images.
Hi drstuggels they are a few ways to go about this.
WebRTC
To prevent upload from any file, take picture directly on your web interface, via the user webcam.
You would need to
Ask permission to the user to use the webcam.
Open the video stream
Capture on click the frame
Save the frame
This would prevent lambda users from uploading picture "not live".
If this is a solution you are considering, look for WebRTC. Although there are many blog post showcasing demo for this exact use case.
Such as:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/WebRTC_API/Taking_still_photos
EXIF validation
As mentioned by iѕєρєня, you could try to access the EXIF metadata of the uploaded picture and run a validation mechanism, for let say freshness but looking for date and time field (if you are looking for a newly taken photo) or the camera model field to make sure it was taken by a camera (phone, DSLR, etc..).
DISCLAIMER:
Nothing will prevent a malicious user from tampering with the js code or file to upload fake picture.
I want to be able to do this
<a-videosphere src="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diBozKDxVLI" autplay="true"></a-videosphere>
Is there any way I can without pointing to a locally stored file?
You can't render a YouTube video as a texture in WebGL. YouTube does not offer an URL to extract the video source. The official player is the only way they have to place ads and monetize the service. If you could stream a video directly you would be able to freely redistribute YouTube content. Technically, it's possible to create a web service that downloads YouTube videos and expose them through a streaming endpoint but it will go against the terms of service:
https://www.youtube.com/static?template=terms
https://aframe.io/faq/#can-i-render-youtube-videos-as-a-texture
With some manual effort, you could either proxy YouTube videos as a texture or download them locally to serve, but that is against their terms of service.
If i have a filename for a local file on the computer:
$img = "deskfile:///D%3A%2FSCANS%2F%23AUKT%2Fimg2014%2F2014-06+SP%2FEPSON007.jpg"
how can i upload it the server without using the "file selector"?
If i enter the file adresses in the url window of a browser i can display the image.
But if i load the image in tag they won't display. I've read it's becuse of restrictions in the browser.
I can't add a value caluse to the either.
Is there anyway to upload the image from the string?
Or can i at least open the correct directory in the "file selector" so the user wont have the browse the whole computer when looking for the file?
Yes there is a way. You can use the File API with Html5 and/or a polyfill for this to load the image in the browser before posting it back to the server. The best such polyfill that I know of is called Moxy/Plupload. It includes Flash and Silverlight fallbacks for older browsers.
You can display the image because it is stored locally in your computer. How do you know where is the image going to be in the user's computer. The only way to access the user's file system is through the file selector, once the user has selected a file you can then use any API to save that file in the server on your terms, but you will not be able to see each of your users file system from you page (security reasons). Could you elaborate more in what you are trying to accomplish? What exactly are you trying to do?
Currently confirmed when viewing the email on OSX Firefox Gmail and Android Gmail app.
Our main marketing email logo is getting distorted when viewed via Google's cached image server.
Gmail has the correct reference to the site
But, when cached and linked via ci3.googleusercontent.com/proxy, it gets messed up!
Google compress the image before adding it to the cached image server. This affect different file formats differently. PNG image without alpha channel seems to be best option to avoid distortion.
Thanks to #ian-vaughan for helping out!
I'm trying to tweet an image from an iOS5 app with code like this:
TWTweetComposeViewController *tweeter = [[TWTweetComposeViewController alloc] init];
[tweeter addImage:image];
I think my EXIF is being stripped out, but not sure if it is my fault, the iOS Twitter code or the Twitter service. I haven't found an authoritative answer yet, but How can I get geotagged pictures posted on twitter? seemed to point at Twitter and Twitter photo sharing goes live for all users had this in their news story:
Photographers will be interested to learn that all EXIF data,
information that identifies what equipment was used to take a picture
as well as the settings used, is stripped from the photos after
uploading
I'm trying to find an official source or better authority that my code. I also tried to Tweet a picture from the Photos app, which also seems to have lost EXIF (location) data after upload.
From the Twitter Help Center:
What happens to the Exif data? I heard there are privacy concerns
there.
We remove the Exif data on upload. It is not available to any
consumers of your image.
Just found Social Media sites: photo metadata test results which tested various sites, including Facebook, Twitter and Google+. An excerpt from their site says:
We have uploaded a test image with embedded metadata and have checked
if any of the embedded values are displayed and if so, which ones. As
a next step we have tried to save the picture from a Social Media web
site or system on our computer and then we checked what metadata
fields are still embedded.
The Twitter test results (as of March 2013) are:
No metadata shown, all embedded metadata stripped-off from image
files.