On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 03:43:04PM -0700, Philip Langdale wrote: > On Wed, 14 Sep 2022 23:08:16 +0200 > Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote: [...] > > > + // Favour formats where bit depth exactly matches. If > > > all other > > > + // scoring is equal, we'd rather use the bit depth > > > that most closely > > > + // matches the source. > > > > ok > > > > > > > + loss |= FF_LOSS_EXCESS_DEPTH; > > > + score -= 1 << -depth_delta; > > > > but does that do that ? > > a 1bpp -> 16bpp has a considerable -depth_delta > > > > do we need the << at all ? > > The idea here is to have the scoring reflect the gap. Are you saying > you'd just apply the depth_delta as-is (just a small number 1 <= n <= > 15)?
yes it makes this less constrained with the shifts there are only 32 distinct values with a int I presume the shifts where there to give the loss some material sense as in PSNR or SAD or something like that, 8 bits output having 4 times worse precission than 10 bit for example. thx [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB It is what and why we do it that matters, not just one of them.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
