[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH]lavfi/telecine: Mark telecined frames as interlaced

[Paul B Mahol]

On 4/12/20, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
> Am So., 12. Apr. 2020 um 11:35 Uhr schrieb Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com>:
>>
>> On 4/12/20, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Am So., 12. Apr. 2020 um 10:38 Uhr schrieb Paul B Mahol
>> > <onemda at gmail.com>:
>> >>
>> >> On 4/11/20, Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On 4/11/20, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> Am Sa., 11. Apr. 2020 um 15:10 Uhr schrieb Paul B Mahol
>> >> >> <onemda at gmail.com>:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On 4/11/20, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> > Am So., 5. Apr. 2020 um 02:05 Uhr schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos
>> >> >>> > <ceffmpeg at gmail.com>:
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> Am So., 5. Apr. 2020 um 01:02 Uhr schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos
>> >> >>> >> <ceffmpeg at gmail.com>:
>> >> >>> >> >
>> >> >>> >> > Am Sa., 4. Apr. 2020 um 00:44 Uhr schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos
>> >> >>> >> > <ceffmpeg at gmail.com>:
>> >> >>> >> > >
>> >> >>> >> > > Am Sa., 4. Apr. 2020 um 00:40 Uhr schrieb James Almer
>> >> >>> >> > > <jamrial at gmail.com>:
>> >> >>> >> > > >
>> >> >>> >> > > > On 4/3/2020 6:37 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>> >> >>> >> > > > > Am Fr., 3. Apr. 2020 um 23:19 Uhr schrieb Carl Eugen
>> >> >>> >> > > > > Hoyos
>> >> >>> >> > > > > <ceffmpeg at gmail.com>:
>> >> >>> >> > > > >
>> >> >>> >> > > > >> Attached patch marks actually telecined frames as
>> >> >>> >> > > > >> interlaced,
>> >> >>> >> > > > >> other frames as progressive.
>> >> >>> >> > > > >
>> >> >>> >> > > > > New patch with changes to fate attached.
>> >> >>> >> > > > >
>> >> >>> >> > > > > Please comment, Carl Eugen
>> >> >>> >> > > >
>> >> >>> >> > > > Those yadif tests look wrong. The patch shouldn't affect
>> >> >>> >> > > > them.
>> >> >>> >> > >
>> >> >>> >> > > Clearly, thank you!
>> >> >>> >> > >
>> >> >>> >> > > New patch attached, it should now only change the telecined
>> >> >>> >> > > frames and leave the other frames as they are, the setfield
>> >> >>> >> > > filter can be used to force a progressive setting for them.
>> >> >>> >> >
>> >> >>> >> > New patch attached that also sets top_field_first
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> Which had the effect that fate is correct again, new patch
>> >> >>> >> attached.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > Patch applied.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> This was never approved by me.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You reviewed it on irc and correctly pointed out the missing bits.
>> >> >
>> >> > Lies, I was against that idea from start.
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> So revert it ASAP!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What should be changed about it?
>> >> >
>> >> > Return of code as it was before this pointless change.
>> >> > I see no good out of it.
>> >>
>> >> I gonna revert this ASAP!
>> >
>> > Could you explain why it is wrong to mark interlaced frames
>> > as interlaced?
>>
>> The frames are not interlaced.
>
> Using the usual 3:2 telecine, the filter outputs two progressive
> frames, followed by three interlaced frames, the patch should
> mark the interlaced frames as interlaced and I believe it does.
>

You are very ignorant or very stupid or both.
Interlaced frames are frames produced by interlacing.
Telecine is not interlacing.

>> I thought you knew that interlacing destroys half of data.
>> Telecine does not destroys data.
>
> Telecine duplicates some data, leading to interlaced frames.
> A (perfect) detecine process can remove the duplicated data
> (and the interlaced frames).
>
> Carl Eugen
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-devel-request at ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".