Adding Flash Video to a website without using a service like Vimeo or YouTube can be challenging if you are not a Flash Action Script expert. Maybe you have a intranet or paid content site and you need to host the video files on your own server and want to display the files in a custom player that matches the look of your site.
Enter the Flowplayer, a free (GPL License) highly customizable Flash Video player jam packed with all the features you might need for you progressive or streaming video website.
Features:
- Works with progressive or streaming
- Basic colors can be altered and fully skinnable
- Playlist support
- Fullscreen mode
- Embed links
- Tons of features that can be configured using simple JavaScript
- Active development with full documentation and user community
Here is a demo using the default dark skin playing a clip I encoded (downloaded from OpenFootage.net)
If you plan to use the Flowplayer for a commercial site, licenses are available starting at $75. The primary difference between the free and licensed versions is that in the free version you have to provide a link to the Flowplayer site and the Flowplayer logo is displayed over the video in fullscreen mode.
I did have trouble getting the Flowplayer to work with Wordpress on IE7. Also, I really wish they would drop the huge watermark on fullscreen mode in the free version.
At this time I still recommend the JW FLV Media player if you are using Wordpress or other CMS or since they offer lots of plug-ins to make it simple to embed videos in blog posts and do not show any watermarks in the free version.
Rating: 
Learn more & download @ http://flowplayer.org/
Related posts
Loading ...
9 Comments
Have you tested JW FLV Media player and FlowPlayer for performance? Branding aside, the JW player just seems clunkier – I am about to do side-by-side testing to see for sure.
I’ve investigated FlowPlayer and I will say they do a great job documenting, it’s very easy to use and it looks very professional. If you are doing this for a client or a business $99 to remove branding doesn’t seem out of line to me…
Mahalie, Thanks for your comment. I have been meaning to do some further testing. JW just released version 4 and I am sure that FlowPlayer has matured since I last used it. One thing I didn’t like with FlowPlayer is that they gave too many JavaScript options and I could not get fullscreen playback working correctly. Also, the large watermark in the free version didn’t help either.
One area where the JW Player really shines is that it is widely supported and there are dozens of plugins for open source web applications that really make it a breeze to use. If you do a comparison, please let us know your results. Also, if you are interested in being a guest author, that would be great.
You will need a commerical license with the JW Player if you plan to monetize your videos in any way with advertising unless you use the JW longtail ad service. The commercial license is very expensive!!! (1,000+ euros per year depending on your volume). that is why I am choosing Flowplayer. they are CDN agnostic (JW longtail owns a cdn), advertising agnostic (jw longtail has an ad service). Flowplayer does one thing – makes great video players and relys on the cdn and ad sales partners to do the rest. And Flowplayer is open source. I’ve used both and Flowplayer is the way to go in my mind.
Scott – You make some really good points. If you use the JW Player on any type of commercial site, you will have to purchase a license. Currently the license cost is 30 Euros. I am not sure where you are seeing 1,000+ Euros? The 30 Euro license supports up to 5,000,000 plays per month on a single domain which is more than enough for all but the most high traffic sites out there. They are also asking that you do not create any of your own modications to support ads. The license clearly states that any of these conditions may be waived with permission from them. Additionally, they offer plugins for Double Click DART, YuMe, and the Long Tail Ad Solution which “allows you to embed any ad tag from any ad network into your website’s media player.” IMHO, these conditions are not very restrictive considering what you get in return and at this time I would still recommend this player for most people looking to easily add video to their sites.
I think it is really important for anyone considering either player to compare each one and choose the right one for their project. I have nothing against the Flowplayer and I love the fact that it is open source. A full comparison of both players is in order.
I am also debating which one to buy. I have used both and it seems like Flowplayer is more customizable than JW. Albeit is harder but I am by trade a programmer so it doesn’t bother me. I also think that JW performs better, but there are major limitations on formatting playlists. Plus creating a dynamic playlist (I.E. from a database) is nearly impossible. You need a separate file for JW whereas in Flowplayer the playlist is in your HTML file. I agree with you that a full comparison i in order
An alternative is BitGravity’s free Flash player which take a few seconds to set up, allows you to alter numerous parameters with a simple interface, and best of all it’s free.
http://player.bitgravity.com
@Skip – Thanks for posting the link to the free player. I am sure it is free for commercial use and you do have to register your email, but it looks pretty cool.
Hi ..
Am just trying to integrate flowplayer and yume ad services .. where can i get yume plugin for flow player. Is thr any tutorial availabale
Thnks
Jasil
@Jasil – You should probably post your inquiry at the Flowplayer forums (http://flowplayer.org/forum/index.html)