On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 02:52:59AM +0100, Hendrik Leppkes wrote: > On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Nicolas George <geo...@nsup.org> wrote: > > > L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit : > > > Oops I misunderstood, you mean the software must comply with the users > > wishes. > > > > Yes. > > > > > Anyway my argument is that BT601 should be the default for the these > > > resolutions. > > > > If you want, but that must happen immediately when the contents enters into > > FFmpeg's data structure, not at a random point in the processing chain. > > > > > Without arguing for or against BT.601 behaviour... > > nvenc should behave the same as libx264, or any other video encoder, if > this patch makes it do that, then it should be applied.
Yes, and AFAICS an earlier mail from philip indicates this is the case
"
Stream #0:0: Video: rawvideo (RGB[24] / 0x18424752), rgb24, 720x576
[SAR 64:45 DAR 16:9], 25 tbr, 25 tbn, 25 tbc
With libx264, I get the same SAR and DAR out.
With nvenc, I get:
sample_aspect_ratio=16:11
display_aspect_ratio=20:11
"
In above example the user asks for a NON BT.601 format 720x576 at
SAR 64:45 and a DAR related to 720x576 NOT 702 or 704x576 of 16:9
yet nvenc gives her something else
[...]
--
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision
of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet
notwithstanding go out to meet it. -- Thucydides
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
