On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Ronald S. Bultje <rsbul...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Ronald S. Bultje <rsbul...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Vignesh Venkatasubramanian < >> vigneshv-at-google....@ffmpeg.org> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 11:06 AM, James Almer <jamr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > On 7/1/2016 2:53 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: >>> >> Hi, >>> >> >>> >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:40 PM, James Zern < >>> jzern-at-google....@ffmpeg.org> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceho...@ag.or.at> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>> Do we have decoder support (for either vp8 or vp9) for these files? >>> >>>> >>> >>>> No, only encoding and muxing. >>> >>> >>> >>> Seems like a feature request, but no reason to block this one if the >>> >>> vp8 one is here. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> I'm not sure I have an opinion on this... But it feels strange to allow >>> >> encoding of content we cannot decode. Being ffmpeg, how do we recommend >>> >> people handle the files created with this feature, if not by using >>> ffmpeg >>> >> itself? >>> >>> One plausible reason is that Chrome can decode this. So it will be >>> useful for people who already have ffmpeg in their pipelines and want >>> to create such files. And like James Almer mentioned, this isn't a >>> first. VP8 Alpha has been this way too. >> >> >> The fact that something is the way it is, does not prove that it is >> therefore right, or that we should therefore continue doing it that way in >> other cases. >> >> So you're suggesting that it is perfectly fine for people to use Chrome as >> decoder if FFmpeg is the encoder. What if people don't have Chrome >> installed? Or what if they want a way of UI-less batch-processing such >> files, e.g. what if a service like Youtube/Vimeo wants to allow upload of >> vp8a/vp9a files without invoking Chrome for decoding? >> > > Additional evidence in [1], [2]. > > There absolutely seems to be interest in support for vp8a/vp9a decoding > outside Chrome. I'm not saying you should implement it in all multimedia > frameworks ever created in human history, but doing it in one of them (e.g. > ffmpeg, since it already supports encoding) certainly sounds helpful? >
I'm not saying alpha decoder shouldn't ever be implemented in ffmpeg. I'm just saying that it shouldn't be a reason to block this patch. :) Sorry if i wasn't clear before. > Ronald > > [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=735450 > [2] > http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-user/2014-September/023436.html > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel -- Vignesh _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
