The death of QuickTime for Java?
July 10, 2010 10:47 PM Subscribe
I have a new Mac with OSX 10.6.3 and QuickTime Player (Version 10.0) already installed and want to know whether I can still get QuickTime for Java.
I have imagej (freeware). Imagej has a plugin called QuickTime Movie Writer. This plugin enables the creation of QT movies from image stacks. The plugin requires QuickTime for Java. QuickTime for Java has apparently been deprecated by Apple (source). However, I don't really know what this means. Can I still download/use it? If so, how?
I've signed up as a developer with Apple, but I'm not having any luck finding anything at the Mac Dev Center.
Any thoughts/suggestions welcomed.
I have imagej (freeware). Imagej has a plugin called QuickTime Movie Writer. This plugin enables the creation of QT movies from image stacks. The plugin requires QuickTime for Java. QuickTime for Java has apparently been deprecated by Apple (source). However, I don't really know what this means. Can I still download/use it? If so, how?
I've signed up as a developer with Apple, but I'm not having any luck finding anything at the Mac Dev Center.
Any thoughts/suggestions welcomed.
And I should mention that if your goal is to take a series of images and create a movie, there are much easier ways than dealing with deprecated software. ffmpeg for example can create a movie from a series of images and it supports a wide variety of codecs and containers.
posted by Rhomboid at 12:11 AM on July 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by Rhomboid at 12:11 AM on July 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
Quicktime X and Quicktime 7 coexist wonderfully. I thought the base Snow Leopard install put QTX in the Apps folder and QT7 in the Utilities folder. If it ins't there, it is in the optional installs folder on the system DVD.
Quicktime is a pretty core component to Mac OS X so getting rid of Quicktime X's guts could kill anything from system event sounds, iTunes and every other AV dependency.
I think kisch mokusch biggest problem will be that until 10.6, Quicktime for Java was part of the base OS so there was nothing to download for Mac users. To get it to work, you'll need to find someone on the web that has the package or find it in an older version of the OS. Maybe ADC has it, but from my cursory googling just now, it looks like Apple pretty much stopped working on it toward six years ago.
This guy seems to have figured out how to get QTJ running but it might not work for this application. Even if it does, an Mac OS or Java update might break it.
I'm not sure what the image stacks are but if it as Rhomboid suggests, it might be better to explore more current alternatives to your problem.
posted by birdherder at 2:03 AM on July 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
Quicktime is a pretty core component to Mac OS X so getting rid of Quicktime X's guts could kill anything from system event sounds, iTunes and every other AV dependency.
I think kisch mokusch biggest problem will be that until 10.6, Quicktime for Java was part of the base OS so there was nothing to download for Mac users. To get it to work, you'll need to find someone on the web that has the package or find it in an older version of the OS. Maybe ADC has it, but from my cursory googling just now, it looks like Apple pretty much stopped working on it toward six years ago.
This guy seems to have figured out how to get QTJ running but it might not work for this application. Even if it does, an Mac OS or Java update might break it.
I'm not sure what the image stacks are but if it as Rhomboid suggests, it might be better to explore more current alternatives to your problem.
posted by birdherder at 2:03 AM on July 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Thank you for the responses.
Yes, the ultimate goal is indeed to convert image sequences into movies. imagej creates .avi files easily enough, but they are uncompressed (which means the file size is huge). I was hoping for something that would make .mov or .mpeg, since they're usually nice and small. I hadn't heard of ffmpeg, and will give it a go (though it looks a bit ominous at first glance). Something that can compress the .avi would be another option.
I actually have QT7 as well (it's in my Utilities folder, I just discovered), but it evidently didn't come with QTJ. Before I discovered that, however, I had tried downloading it and was told that I couldn't put it on while QTX was there. I don't want to remove QTX. And I'm happy to try other options.
posted by kisch mokusch at 2:32 AM on July 11, 2010
Yes, the ultimate goal is indeed to convert image sequences into movies. imagej creates .avi files easily enough, but they are uncompressed (which means the file size is huge). I was hoping for something that would make .mov or .mpeg, since they're usually nice and small. I hadn't heard of ffmpeg, and will give it a go (though it looks a bit ominous at first glance). Something that can compress the .avi would be another option.
I actually have QT7 as well (it's in my Utilities folder, I just discovered), but it evidently didn't come with QTJ. Before I discovered that, however, I had tried downloading it and was told that I couldn't put it on while QTX was there. I don't want to remove QTX. And I'm happy to try other options.
posted by kisch mokusch at 2:32 AM on July 11, 2010
The size of a video file is a function of the codec and the bitrate. The container format doesn't matter. In other words, a .mov file could contain Sorenson video at 500 kbit/s, mp4 at 2000 kbit/s, or h264 at 5000 kbit/s. Pick a codec and a bitrate, and then decide on a container format that supports that codec. For example, support you chose h264 as video codec, 1000 kbit/s as bitrate, and mp4 as container format: ffmpeg -i input.avi -vcodec libx264 -b 1000k output.mp4.
posted by Rhomboid at 4:31 AM on July 11, 2010
posted by Rhomboid at 4:31 AM on July 11, 2010
(Well, to be pedantic the size is only a function of bitrate alone, but an acceptable bitrate will depend on the codec chosen as well as the resolution, framerate, and desired quality.)
posted by Rhomboid at 4:38 AM on July 11, 2010
posted by Rhomboid at 4:38 AM on July 11, 2010
Judging by that wiki page, it doesn't sound like QTJ will run with QT7 or on an Intel Mac, anyway.
posted by Thorzdad at 6:00 AM on July 11, 2010
posted by Thorzdad at 6:00 AM on July 11, 2010
I would recommend doing anything you can to avoid QTJ.
posted by ivey at 10:39 AM on July 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by ivey at 10:39 AM on July 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Okay, have officially given up on the dream of using QTJ ever again. I liked the idea of doing everything in imagej, but I was never married to the idea.
Rhomboid, I'm not comfortable enough with scripting to use ffmpeg at this point, but thank you for bringing it to my attention. I am only now introducing myself to the terminal-driven commands, and ffmpeg looks like something that could be very useful in the future. For now, I have found flv crunch does a pretty good job of down-sizing my .avi files.
Thank you for all your responses.
posted by kisch mokusch at 6:00 PM on July 11, 2010
Rhomboid, I'm not comfortable enough with scripting to use ffmpeg at this point, but thank you for bringing it to my attention. I am only now introducing myself to the terminal-driven commands, and ffmpeg looks like something that could be very useful in the future. For now, I have found flv crunch does a pretty good job of down-sizing my .avi files.
Thank you for all your responses.
posted by kisch mokusch at 6:00 PM on July 11, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Rhomboid at 12:03 AM on July 11, 2010