On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 12:58:23 +0100 Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 11:16:49AM +0100, wm4 wrote: > > On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 10:54:28 +0100 > > Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 08:52:32AM +0100, Nicolas George wrote: > > > > Le sextidi 16 brumaire, an CCXXIV, Michael Niedermayer a écrit : > > > > > iam with whatever default people prefer > > > > > > > > IIRC, the current default yields different results when rematrixing from > > > > float to float and then converting from float to int than when doing > > > > both in > > > > a single step. > > > > > > yes, OTOH float -> float rematrix + "inverse" float->float should be > > > closer to the original than with the changed default > > > The difference between the defaults is in volume of the output > > > > > > > > > > I beliee this is not good. > > > > > > no its not good, though the alternative isnt really good either. > > > All choices have some kind of disadvantage. There also would be the > > > possibility of implementing 2 pass mode to maintain the volume as much > > > as possible without cliping (but that could not easily be default) > > > For the default, the question is what people prefer ... > > > > Do you mean some kind of DRC? > > no but that would be another possibility as well Then I don't know what you meant by this 2 pass mode. Can you explain? I'm interested in obtaining better downmix. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
