On 01/31/2016 03:27 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
It's not bizarre at all. Black & white is just a variant of
palettized data in this context, it's not monochrome. And just
because you don't have a non-b/w sample, it doesn't mean you should
use monow. A 1 bpp AVI is not monochrome once again, it's
palettized, even if it's only with black & white. The same semantics
as with 1 bpp depth in QuickTime.
well, avi is a "old" format and ive worked with avis and maintained
the avi demuxer for a long time. So if i dont remember a paletted 1bpp
avi thats some indication that these would be rather rare if they
exist at all
They are rare, alright, but we should follow the specs, shouldn't we?
And the specs tell us that 1 bpp AVI is not just black & white but
palettized, albeit with only 2 colors. TIFF is a different story, it
explicitly has a "bilevel" format which is black & white only.
And since you don't have a "pal2" or "pal4" format, it suddenly
seems perfectly OK to convert this to pal8? THere's no logic in
this.
the problem is what happens with the data after the rawvideo decoder
if its to be stored in a file the encoder will store 8bit paletted data
(if it supports that) vs. 1bit monochrome data (if it supports that)
making generated files potentially several times bigger
Not good enough as an argument for using monow. The space increase of
using pal8 compared to monochrome is hardly an issue nowadays. It was in
the early 90s, but that was then.
Mats
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
