Thanks, Peter. I do not mean jerky like fits and starts, but rather a slightly
uneven flow like a bicycle wheel with somewhat worn bearings. It may just be
from the youtube. Anyway, it is pretty darn cool.
John Hartog
rockacallop.org
--- In Peter Shute wrote:
>
> I ended up using sox, the command line audio program, to dump the image. Not
> quite as good as some of the other programs I tried, but it has the advantage
> that I have full control of the scales, and I can now probably automate the
> whole process.
>
> It will only create an image a maximum of 5000 pixels wide (3 minutes at the
> scale I chose), so I had to join dozens of them together, but that can be
> automated too. The program authors have agreed to increase it to 200,000
> pixels in the next release, probably sometime this year. All the other
> programs I tried had some sort of limit, generally less than half an hour,
> after which they'd crash or include random data in the image, or refuse to
> dump. I only looked at free programs.
>
> What do you mean by jerky? The scrolling, or the audio itself? Either way,
> you'd think it would be better when it's not being streamed from the
> Internet. It's also been twice compressed - once by me to get it small enough
> to upload, and once by YouTube in unknown ways.
>
> My main incentive for doing this was to make spectrograms of my recordings
> more accessible to birders who don't know how to create their own. I find
> that if I ask for expert advice about the id of a bird calling softly in the
> background of a dawn chorus, for example, people often can't understand which
> bit I mean. This way I can draw labels on the spectrogram image before I turn
> it into a movie, and hopefully it'll assist them, at least with the timing of
> the call.
>
> Another idea I had recently was to put movies of new recordings onto my iPad.
> That would let me review them more efficiently, in bed, on the train, etc,
> than just listening to audio. I wish I could make notes directly on the movie
> frames.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 13/01/2013, at 3:31 PM, "rock_scallop" > wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Peter,
> What do you mean by "dumped spectrogram images?" What are you using to
> generate the images to be dumped?
> Nice sounds. I played the long one for a little while, a wee bit jerky but I
> think it's acceptable for an online viewing. Would it play smoother as a
> download or DVD video?
>
> John Hartog
> rockscallop.org
>
> --- In , "Marc Myers" wrote:
> >
> > There are shortcomings to Acousmographe but I've used it for some time. My
> > original solution was to convert the Flash movie to another format with SWF
> > & FLV toolkit. Lately I've been using Premiere CS5, I import the FLV file,
> > then add the original audio. Then output to whatever file format I wish.
> > The advantage of Acousmographe is one can annotate.
|