OBS available on MFC: HD Streaming!

[The_Greg1]

I've been in a models' room now and after a few minutes, i got a white screen on my end. Turning the video off/on didn't help, opened up an incognito window and it didn't load at all (that was on chrome&safari). i send mfc support an email and waiting for a reply. I thought i'd share this the forum.

 

[AmberCutie]

I've been in a models' room now and after a few minutes, i got a white screen on my end. Turning the video off/on didn't help, opened up an incognito window and it didn't load at all (that was on chrome&safari). i send mfc support an email and waiting for a reply. I thought i'd share this the forum.

I've stated a few times that currently the state of the HD OBS stuff on MFC is pretty broken and awaiting bug fixes. I hope to be testing new code with them in the coming week or few, but until then, it's probably best models don't use the OBS rtmp unless they want to run into the issue you stated above repeatedly.

 

[The_Greg1]

I've stated a few times that currently the state of the HD OBS stuff on MFC is pretty broken and awaiting bug fixes. I hope to be testing new code with them in the coming week or few, but until then, it's probably best models don't use the OBS rtmp unless they want to run into the issue you stated above repeatedly.

ah ok thanks for the info Would it be ok for you, if i use this information for one of my tweets best regards

 

[Fedekalven]

Is anyone experimenting with nginx on a vps to multistream to MFC and BC ?

Yes. I have it up and running on a linode VPS. Works perfect on CB, but I ran into the same problems as other models here with MFC, no preview, users complaining about not being able to see the stream. But it was pretty trivial to get working on Ubuntu.

 

[Ronaldod]

Yes. I have it up and running on a linode VPS. Works perfect on CB, but I ran into the same problems as other models here with MFC, no preview, users complaining about not being able to see the stream. But it was pretty trivial to get working on Ubuntu.

If CB works there are problems with on MFC. About it the solution itself how is the extra lag in the stream ?

 

[AmberCutie]

there are problems with on MFC.

I feel like people are failing to read posts over the last page and a half of this thread.

Yes, issues right now, isn't working properly. They're working on it, and I hope to test it for them soon.

 

[DJ_Pioneer]

I feel like people are failing to read posts over the last page and a half of this thread.

Yes, issues right now, isn't working properly. They're working on it, and I hope to test it for them soon.

I think it is one of those cases where people want this to work so badly that they read the first post and then assume that they are doing something wrong when it isn't working. Then they make a post about it wanting to fix it instead of reading some more and learn that there is nothing to do but to wait for MFC to fix it.

 

[Fedekalven]

If CB works there are problems with on MFC. About it the solution itself how is the extra lag in the stream ?

A second more if that. I dident re-encode the stream on my VPS, so if you have a decent host there is no problems. I tried a few cheaper providers first, and they could not handle the throughput and it would result in 40% dropped frames.

Sorry if I am beating a dead horse Amber, all I wanted to add to the conversation was the nginx aspect of OBS.

 

[AmberCutie]

Sorry if I am beating a dead horse Amber, all I wanted to add to the conversation was the nginx aspect of OBS.

Not beating the horse, just want you and everyone to know that problems right now aren't all on your end, that MFC is working on fixing the issues.

 

[Ronaldod]

Sorry for derailing the threat. I was thinking beyond this MFC. As CB and MFC have integrated this also other sites will possible follow. That means a lot of performers need more upstream. So a solution could be to get your own vps (Virtual Private Server) and split it from there and saving bandwidth, costs and as option to cam to multiple sites at the same time.
1 stream to CB is around 5Mbit and not everyone in the world is having access to providers that gives a lot of upstream.

 

[Fedekalven]

To add to the multistreaming side of things. I tried getting cam4 to work. But that page does not support it and I had trouble getting a usable answer when i wrote support and talked to them about it. If anyone know of more sites that allow RTMP (OBS streaming) I would love to see a list and try to see if VPS streaming is possible there.

 

[DJ_Pioneer]

It looks like MFC did an update yesterday, @Ariana_Gray is able to stream in HD again, but the issues with the white screen from the video not loading and crashing still persists. Most models can probably wait a little longer for it to become more stable unless they are really interested in HD streaming and don't mind dealing with issues that the site currently has.

 

[Smores]

Sorry for derailing the threat. I was thinking beyond this MFC. As CB and MFC have integrated this also other sites will possible follow. That means a lot of performers need more upstream. So a solution could be to get your own vps (Virtual Private Server) and split it from there and saving bandwidth, costs and as option to cam to multiple sites at the same time.
1 stream to CB is around 5Mbit and not everyone in the world is having access to providers that gives a lot of upstream.

How does a VPS configuration work? Model streams to the VPS server in the cloud? And the VPS server then copies the stream to multiple webcam sites?

You have to pay for the bandwidth by the byte on the VPS server don't you? How can it be saving bandwidth costs? I do understand it lowers the bandwidth requirement on your local network.

 

[Fedekalven]

How does a VPS configuration work? Model streams to the VPS server in the cloud? And the VPS server then copies the stream to multiple webcam sites?

You have to pay for the bandwidth by the byte on the VPS server don't you? How can it be saving bandwidth costs? I do understand it lowers the bandwidth requirement on your local network.

That's how the restreaming work. Some places in the world you are limited at your home by upstream or cost of upstream. Depening on the place your server is the bandwith cost more or less. The good thing about just restreaming and not re-encoding is that you dont need a powerfull server, so that part wont cost you alot. Only bandwith is going to cost you. I have seen decent providers sell 2 TB traffic for 10 dollars a month, depending on how much you stream and in what quality will decide if that is enough for you or you have to buy more.

 

[Ronaldod]

That's how the restreaming work. Some places in the world you are limited at your home by upstream or cost of upstream. Depening on the place your server is the bandwith cost more or less. The good thing about just restreaming and not re-encoding is that you dont need a powerfull server, so that part wont cost you alot. Only bandwith is going to cost you. I have seen decent providers sell 2 TB traffic for 10 dollars a month, depending on how much you stream and in what quality will decide if that is enough for you or you have to buy more.

Like OVH is selling VPS with 100Mbit bandwith and no limits for like 3$ a month. Just did not test if it is good enough to be used for this type of usage.

 

[Smores]

Like OVH is selling VPS with 100Mbit bandwith and no limits for like 3$ a month. Just did not test if it is good enough to be used for this type of usage.

Usually these "too-good-to-be-true" unlimited bandwidth offers involve compromises somewhere else, like with latency. Maybe big latency would not matter as long as they gave consistent bandwidth. I hope you will post here if you test it.

 

[Smores]

That's how the restreaming work. Some places in the world you are limited at your home by upstream or cost of upstream. Depening on the place your server is the bandwith cost more or less. The good thing about just restreaming and not re-encoding is that you dont need a powerfull server, so that part wont cost you alot. Only bandwith is going to cost you. I have seen decent providers sell 2 TB traffic for 10 dollars a month, depending on how much you stream and in what quality will decide if that is enough for you or you have to buy more.

My math says 2 Terabytes is enough to support a 1080P broadcast continuously for a full month. Am I right on that?

And what's the user interface like on the VPS server to support rebroadcast out to CB and MFC? Is it all wrapped up in some easy to configure web interface, or does the model have to tweak settings files with an editor?

 

[DJ_Pioneer]

My math says 2 Terabytes is enough to support a 1080P broadcast continuously for a full month. Am I right on that?

And what's the user interface like on the VPS server to support rebroadcast out to CB and MFC? Is it all wrapped up in some easy to configure web interface, or does the model have to tweak settings files with an editor?

Can you post your calculations so we can see if you are right?

 

[DFT]

I wonder how much data the coffee pot would have generated by now if it'd been left online. A'yup, that was the highlight of webcamming in 1993, and we liked it.

Try not to be impatient, things you think impossible today will soon be old.

 

[Ronaldod]

Usually these "too-good-to-be-true" unlimited bandwidth offers involve compromises somewhere else, like with latency. Maybe big latency would not matter as long as they gave consistent bandwidth. I hope you will post here if you test it.

I have for other reasons already 2 servers running at this provider. Used a load of bandwidth and the latency. To be honest i have much better performance then AW and Azure at this moment. I have run vpn/proxy and web servers on it. Till now no trouble. They only lack one good thing good personal support. If your good with linux and do not need help it is good. But if you run in OS trouble i wish you luck there.

Just mine experience.

 

[Smores]

Can you post your calculations so we can see if you are right?

I can do even better than my manual calculation. Here is a website that shows a conversion from megabits per second into terabytes per month.

I am assuming a 1080P broadcast requires an upload of about 4 megabits per second (Mbps). So we can correct that assumption to start if it is wrong.

Based on running a single 1080P broadcast at 24 hours per day, that site seems to suggest you need 1.3 terabytes per month.

Converting that to a webcam model's real case, let's assume she works a six hour show, and she uploads the same stream to three webcam sites. That would create a demand equal to about 18 hours per day. The 1.3 TB/month number appears to cover the model for four six-hour shows being simulcast from the same stream, seven days a week.

So a 2 Terabyte service for $10/month looks like a killer good deal. But I think for most webcam models you would need to provide a web-based interface that is easy to use. Tinkering with Linux configuration files is a non-starter for many performers.

 

[Fedekalven]

You are forgetting you also pay for incomming bandwith, so you have to add one more stream because you upload the stream to the server.

Chaturbate recommends 10mBps for a 1080p stream, I am sure you could do with less, but 4 seems a bit on the low side.

As far as operating it, yeah it is command line for now. But it is 1 line of text per site you want to stream on, and then a stop restart command. Pretty sure I could teach most models how to do that.

Compiling and setting it up, well, if you dont have anyone to help you it might be more than a mouthfull for most, but with some help the day to day use is not too bad.

 

[Smores]

You are forgetting you also pay for incomming bandwith, so you have to add one more stream because you upload the stream to the server.

Chaturbate recommends 10mBps for a 1080p stream, I am sure you could do with less, but 4 seems a bit on the low side.

I have a few resources that suggest 4 Mbps would work but let's go with 6 Mbps for kicks.

So with a 2 terabyte (TB) plan, that appears to cover the model for one upload from her computer to a virtual server, and three uploads from the virtual server to webcam sites, for a six hours show seven days a week for a month.

 

[Fedekalven]

Did a little testing tonight. Previews are working now, the flash player wont give me anything other than a white screen. Worked good without flash enabled in the browser though. So they are making progress.

 

[kitty quinn]

A very well written guide. Does this work for CamYou also or is it only MFC at the moment? I hope we are going to see models do some interesting broadcasting stuff with OBS in the future.

You can use on plexstorm as well. (Super new site)

 

[DJ_Pioneer]

You can use on plexstorm as well. (Super new site)

Yes but I don't think Plexstorm is going to be as appealing to models since it has such a small amount of viewers compared to MFC if you want to do gaming and adult things at the same time.

 

[The_Greg1]

A few days ago MFC tested OBS streams on one of their test accounts and when i entered the room, the video feed showed up right away. One model is currently streaming using OBS and i got her stream to load within 1-2 seconds which is way better than it used to be. I don't know about the stability of it yet as i haven't been in a room during a considerable amount of time. @AmberCutie do you have any input, if they did some upgrades with regards to OBS. thanks in advance for your help & information Best Regards

 

[AmberCutie]

A few days ago MFC tested OBS streams on one of their test accounts and when i entered the room, the video feed showed up right away. One model is currently streaming using OBS and i got her stream to load within 1-2 seconds which is way better than it used to be. I don't know about the stability of it yet as i haven't been in a room during a considerable amount of time. @AmberCutie do you have any input, if they did some upgrades with regards to OBS. thanks in advance for your help & information Best Regards

Ah yes I was actually just about to update here!

I used the beta on Tuesday night with much more ease than previous weeks. They have made a handful of changes that seemed to un-fubar it. I know they are actively working on updates and fixes.

There were still a small handful of members that had to intermittently "off/on" their video when it went blank, and a couple people that couldn't handle the HD quality for one of many reasons (bandwidth, CPU, etc.) I'm sure that'll be addressed at some point in the future.

For now I think it's safe for girls with good connections to jump back into the beta if they feel up to it.

 

[CandyCained]

I spent the day setting up my OBS. everything showed as good to go. The browser model window for my cam stated live etc.
HOWEVER no one could see me. I refreshed multiple times all programs. I run very fast internet and even tried to hard wire hoping it would fix this. I tried to change the settings as per above and still have no luck.
I will look through the guides here for alternatives, however so far have found little information.
I hope we all get this sorted out soon!
Cheers

 

[Goblin]

Do models using OBS have the widescreen cam thing?

The quality is really good but the two models I've seen using it, they're very laggy/stuttery feed

I don't think the upgrade in image quality is worth the trade off in smoothness