Name is required.
Email address is required.
Invalid email address
Answer is required.
Exceeding max length of 5KB

AmazonS3

Hi,

I've got a Free account and I'm trying to do some testing to see if JW Player will work for us. The storage limits are too low for us - so we're going to have to use AmazonS3 to store our videos. I've copied the URL from AmazonS3 - and copied that into the Videos / Add Video URL. I'm getting a "Error loading media: File could not be played." I see in trouble shooting that this means the video is formatted wrong- but this is a .mp4 using H264 and plays fine using our existing player (Easy Video Suite).

I uploaded the same file - and that works fine .

I'm finding very little information on how to use AmazonS3 with JW Player. Any help would be much appreciated.

9 Community Answers

Up Down

Todd

JW Player Support Agent  
0 rated :

We use S3 to host of our all QA test pages, so I am not sure what the problem would be.

Do your MP4s play directly in a web browser? Can you provide a link to one of them here?

Are your URLs using HTTP or HTTPS? Our dashboard uses HTTPS, so any HTTP URL will not load in the dashboard, but the video is probably working correctly in a normal embed on your site.

Up Down

Angelo

User  
0 rated :

Thanks Todd - They don't. We're currently using Easy Video Suite - and when I copy the link to one of those vidoes it looks like this:
http://evs-hosted-15166c045c8cf1.s3.amazonaws.com/2015047.mp4
or here's one from a different bucket - having the same issue: http://fusionpilates.s3.amazonaws.com/201721.mp4

Am I not copying the correct url? I'm just using firefox s3fox organizer- and right clicking / copy url...

But all of our videos are within a subscription site - so it's paid content. That's one of the things we're trying to figure out with JWP - will our content still be protected or will people be able to access the video files? We're trying to decide between JWP and Vimeo - which does offer the same protection we have now... but has less player features...

Up Down

Todd

JW Player Support Agent  
0 rated :

I just tried loading http://fusionpilates.s3.amazonaws.com/201721.mp4 directly in Chrome and Safari. I would expect MP4s to be able to play directly in these browsers, but both are downloading the video directly. Normally this would imply a MIME type issue, but I see your MIME type is correct.

Is there some sort of setting on the S3 side that forces these files to be downloaded? When I upload the same video to my S3 bucket, the video plays directly in the browser as expected.

Up Down

Todd

JW Player Support Agent  
0 rated :

Did a little more digging. Your S3 bucket seems to be adding the following header:

Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=201721.mp4

but I don’t see this line from my S3 bucket. Could that be the cause? Can you try removing that on your side?

We can also host your videos for you too. We might charge a few pennies more per GB, but we take care of the heavy lifting for you.

Up Down

angelo gianni

User  
0 rated :

Hi Todd,

Yes- that would be great if we could host with you.

I can afford the Premium plan until we grow - but the storage limit is much too low (also - it's odd that the storage limit isn't listed the pricing information since it's pretty important). But we already have 210GB worth of video stored on S3 and it grows every day. I believe the Premium plan only offers 50GB. We're well under the plays and streaming numbers, but the storage limit makes it impossible.

And I can't find information on how much storage platinum gives you - but that's beyond our budget right now anyway.

The reason Vimeo is looking good to us is because they don't charge any extra for unlimited storage and unlimited streaming. The con is that their player is missing some features that yours has.

Anyway - I definitely wish the storage limit was something that would work for us.

I have no idea why our AmazonS3 links are behaving like this. Could it have anything to do with using Cloudfront?

But again - if hosting with AmazonS3 and using the JW Player is going to cause a link to the video to show up in the source code- this isn't going to work for us anyway. We have to have everything well protected...

Thank you for all of the help. - is there a way to subscribe to these threads? I don't get any alerts on them.

Up Down

e...

User  
0 rated :

I just uploaded a fresh video directly to s3 instead of trying to use one that's already in there. I'm getting the same result.
http://fusionpilates.s3.amazonaws.com/201718.mp4

how would i remove: Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=201721.mp4 ???

Up Down

Todd

JW Player Support Agent  
0 rated :

I agree that we should display the hosting limit for Platinum on the pricing page, so I will share this feedback with the team. I will check with our sales reps to see what the price would be on a custom license that included more hosting and streaming.

As for the video URLs being hidden, there is not much you can do to completely hide the URLs, as the browser needs to make the requests over the internet. Someone who knows what they are doing will always be able to see the requests. Your best option is probably to enable URL signing. The URLs are still visible, but there is an expiration time associated with each URL. Only your server-side code generates the valid token, so the URLs will not work after they expire. Please see http://support.jwplayer.com/customer/portal/articles/1433647-token-signing-with-jw-platform for more details.

Sorry, I am not an expert when it comes to S3 configuration. I do not know how to remove that Content-Disposition: attachment; header.

And I am unfortunately not sure about subscribing to threads. Let me check with the company we use for this forum and see what they provide.

Up Down

angelo

User  
0 rated :

hi todd - just checking in to see if you found anything out about a custom license that included more hosting storage. thx.

Up Down

Todd

JW Player Support Agent  
0 rated :

I forwarded your contact info to our Sales team. They will be reaching out to you directly.

This question has received the maximum number of answers.