Netflix: Open Content

(opencontent.netflix.com)

292 points | by tosh 4 hours ago

15 comments

  • Fiveplus 1 hour ago
    This could be a huge deal for anyone working on video codecs or display tech. Finding legally clear, high-quality, uncompressed (or mezzanine) 4K HDR footage to test encoders against is surprisingly difficult. Most test footage you find online has already been stomped on by YouTube or Meta compression.

    Having the raw EXR sequences and the IMF packages for Sol Levante and Meridian means researchers can finally benchmark AV1 vs HEVC vs VVC using source material that actually has the dynamic range to show the differences. The fact that they included the Dolby vision metadata is the cherry on top.

    • Uehreka 47 minutes ago
      Don’t most camera manufacturers (like ARRI and BlackMagic) have test footage for their raw and/or log formats on their websites? Here’s ARRI’s (which includes ProRes in addition to their proprietary formats) https://www.arri.com/en/learn-help/learn-help-camera-system/...
      • randall 11 minutes ago
        yeah but distributing them is probably not just “oh it’s open source!”
  • _flux 3 hours ago
    Funny how how all the links, including the ones to their own pages, are routed through google.com/url, e.g. the link "Assets Available to Download". Usually tracking isn't quite this visible.
    • reddalo 2 hours ago
      It's because their blog is hosted on blogger.com (yeah, weird decision), which is owned by Google and does that by default.
    • cfn 9 minutes ago
      And when I click them I get a page with "Did you mean netflix.com? The site you just tried to visit looks fake. Attackers sometimes mimic sites by making small, hard-to-see changes to the URL." which then sends me to the Netfçix home page. Chrome on MacOS.
    • afandian 3 hours ago
      It is very odd. I don’t see a good reason, not even tracking.
      • jmathai 2 hours ago
        Aren't those just the URLs in google search results if you copy from the results page instead of clicking through to the destination?
        • esrauch 54 minutes ago
          The reason for the intermediary is because the clickthrough sends the previous URL as a referer to the next server.

          The only real way to avoid leaking specific urls from the source page to the arbitrary other server is to have an intermediary redirect like this.

          All the big products put an intermediary for that reason, though many of them make it a user visible page of that says "you are leaving our product" versus Google mostly does it as an immediate redirect.

          The copy/paste behavior is mostly an unfortunate side effect and not a deliberate feature of it.

  • 332451b 1 hour ago
    More recent content from Netflix is part of the ASWF Digital Production Example Library. https://dpel.aswf.io/
  • HelloUsername 4 hours ago
  • carschno 4 hours ago
    The last addition was made in 2020.
  • jcattle 3 hours ago
    I was curious about this recently. I was wondering about open files of well known artists.

    Unlike netflix/YouTube its not immediately clear to me which Organisation would spearhead something like this out of their own interesting. Closest I know of is the MuseGroup, which are doing this "growing of the pie" with open source music creation Software.

    Anyone know of something else?

  • everlier 1 hour ago
    Is this for some sort of a formal compliance or being able to point out "we host things free of charge too?
    • bwilliams18 1 hour ago
      It's all technical test footage used to test their media pipelines – presumably, they're sharing it to create industry standards, particularly for partner and open-source library implementations.
    • ahartmetz 1 hour ago
      It costs them little and what's in it for them is better codecs -> lower bandwidth expenses. Interests are aligned with the public, it's fine.
  • andrewstuart 2 hours ago
    There’s basically zero innovation in online video.

    Such a pity startups can’t innovate on the content stores of the big companies.

    • gibsonsmog 1 hour ago
      It's actually a regression overall compared to physical media like DVDs and Blurays. No director commentaries, no behind the scenes, no silly menu games, etc. Streaming would theoretically allow for tons of this type of content to be made and connected to a film at any time but instead we have this stagnant recreation of cable TV. C'est la vie
      • michaelbuckbee 1 hour ago
        The lack of director commentaries and behind the scenes content on streaming has always baffled me as the rights to that must be much cheaper to acquire and would result in more minutes of streaming watched for less licensing money.
        • sbarre 1 hour ago
          It's telling that VFX subcontractors are putting out their own BTS content on YouTube now as promotional material, since the primary production companies for shows and films (with a few exceptions) have completely stopped doing this.

          I miss director commentary, I loved re-watching movies with that audio track.

          Is there just too much content now? Or has streaming become such a "content mill" that the creators aren't inspired enough about their own work to sit down and talk about it after it's complete?

          • lotsofpulp 14 minutes ago
            > Is there just too much content now?

            I would guess this is the reason. Before there was unlimited content or ways to entertain yourself on a screen, having additional content on a disc would have been a marketing point to make people feel like they’re getting more for their money.

            But now, I doubt even 1 in 1,000 people would respond to that, since there is always something else that can be instantly switched to watching or playing, so why go through the effort?

        • wincy 1 hour ago
          We’ve started watching Pluribus on Apple TV and it seems like when they’re making the show Apple contractually obligates them to make a podcast about each episode. Some of them are very interesting (like costume design) and some are less so.

          It was funny how the sound engineers remoted in for the podcast and had extremely low quality mics, despite it being a show with fantastic sound (really it’s an excellent show in general, just really good).

      • treesknees 27 minutes ago
        Disney+ has quite a bit of this actually. I agree though that overall most streaming services don’t offer this.
      • expedition32 1 hour ago
        DVDs were iirc 480p which would look absolutely terrible on a modern TV.
    • philipallstar 2 hours ago
      > There’s basically zero innovation in online video.

      AV2 is coming out this year.

      > Such a pity startups can’t innovate on the content stores of the big companies.

      What do you mean?

      • walterbell 1 hour ago
        20 years ago, it was possible to seamlessly merge video clips from multiple streaming RealPlayer servers into a single composite video stream, using a static XML text file (SMIL) distributed via HTTP, with optional HTML annotation and composition.

        This is technically possible today but blocked by DRM and closed apps/players. Innovation would be unlocked if 3rd party apps could create custom viewing experiences based on licensed and purchased content files downloaded locally, e.g. in your local Apple media library. The closed apps could then sherlock/upstream UX improvements that prove broadly useful.

      • afavour 1 hour ago
        Can’t speak for OP but personally I’m thinking of things like the ability to actually add new features. Like what Netflix did with the Bandersnatch episode of Black Mirror years ago. Online video is extremely locked down when compared to the web.
      • ksec 40 minutes ago
        >AV2 is coming out this year.

        Which has less than 48 hours to go.

  • FunnyLookinHat 3 hours ago
    Anyone else surprised that the download links are plain HTTP without SSL? I know it's a page that in the past I would have typically not worried about securing - but nowadays it's SSL everything or else your browser yells at you.
    • ronbenton 2 hours ago
      Yeah, this is bad. The page almost seems like someone’s pet project that didn’t have any explicit funding and they got bored or left Netflix in 2020. I’m not sure how that would explain the lack of SSL cert except for just general lack of thoroughness.
      • reddalo 2 hours ago
        > The page almost seems like someone’s pet project that didn’t have any explicit funding

        It probably is, given that it's just a static page hosted on blogger.com

      • gregoryl 1 hour ago
        From the names mentioned in the most recent blog post, they left late 2022.
    • uyzstvqs 2 hours ago
      I'm surprised they didn't use BitTorrent, with these HTTP links as web seeds. That'd make the most sense.
      • alex_duf 1 hour ago
        Politically it would be an interesting choice for Netflix to encourage people to use their BitTorrent clients..

        But technically, you're right.

    • mrtksn 3 hours ago
      The page look like zero effort given anyway, like one of the free templates you can find.
    • robingchan 2 hours ago
      this is hosted on s3 which doesn't support HTTPS, that said - if they used cloudfront in front of this bucket, they could save $$$ and have a SSL
  • cooper_ganglia 3 hours ago
    Cool! I'm looking forward to going through some of these, looks very interesting!
  • levibev 1 hour ago
    [dead]
  • danielktdoranie 4 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • FartyMcFarter 4 hours ago
      They have downloadable files that you don't need an account for.
  • Adesany 4 hours ago
    [flagged]
  • niceboy2 2 hours ago
    I love it just because squid game.
  • game_the0ry 53 minutes ago
    With all that $500K talent, you would think they could make a better looking website.