Nicholas Robbins <nickrobbins-at-yahoo.com <at> ffmpeg.org> writes:
> Do you have a sample where dejudder used like this helps? http://samples.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg-bugs/trac/ticket3968/ > If so does it work better with larger n? I didn't test because it works fine afaict. > Your suggestion is for material that is a mix of 30 fps > progressive and 24->30 telecined? I don't know that you > would want to decimate that. It will produce judder > from the dropped frames. That might be a usecase for > the new framerate filter. I don't have such a sample but since the fieldmatch - decimate combination would not support it (it only makes sense for 24 fps output), I don't think it has any relevance for the fieldmatch documentation. > Or are you offering a suggestion for mixed 24fps > progressive and 24->30 telecined? Yes. > In that case it seems like this should work. This is what my tests showed. (But I don't have a long sample.) > You are using dejudder & fps to produce a stream of > frames lies ABCDDEFGHH... then decimate drops the > dups. Seems brutal. Why / how? > Is there a reason why this filter chain is preferable > to pullup,dejudder? (perhaps with fps) or is this > just another option? pullup is a faster alternative that may not produce perfect output, I don't think it works (or can be used) with the fps filter (that I consider being broken or at least showing unexpected behaviour. Carl Eugen _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
