> On 23 Aug 2016, at 21:21, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi! > > 2016-08-23 19:10 GMT+02:00 Oliver Collyer <ovcoll...@mac.com>: >> + AV_PIX_FMT_YUV420P10LE, > > I know this is theoretical but the Nvidia header seems to indicate > native endianness to me, so this should be AV_PIX_FMT_YUV420P10 > >> + AV_PIX_FMT_YUV444P10LE > > But after reading the rest of the patch: > Shouldn't this be AV_PIX_FMT_YUV444P16? > > And instead of YUV420P10, shouldn't you use P010LE? >
So I’ve tried with P010 but ran into a problem in that this pixel format is only supported as an input format. In my test I’m reading a yuv420p file and then specifying -pix_fmt P010 but this is giving an error message saying the conversion is impossible. ffmpeg -pix_fmts confirms it is only valid as an input format. Of course, if the source is P010 then presumably there is no problem. What should I do? Maybe support both P010 so that if someone has a source in this format it can be encoded natively but also support YUV420P10 with my conversion/shifting routine? Or should I just support P010 and then consider it a limitation of FFmpeg that it cannot convert a different format to this one? Regards Oliver > In any case, please split the rate control patch from the 10bit patch. > > Carl Eugen > > who wonders now how the Microsoft headers define the ten bit > yuv420 semi-planar format... > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
