2017-09-29 11:03 GMT+02:00 Martin Vignali <martin.vign...@gmail.com>: > 2017-09-28 23:24 GMT+02:00 Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com>: > >> 2017-09-28 21:50 GMT+02:00 Martin Vignali <martin.vign...@gmail.com>: >> >> > After comments about the previous patchs >> >> Please explain how this encoder and decoder can be used >> from the FFmpeg cli: What kind of input could be used, what >> could be done with the output? >> >> I believe you force every user to add an additional filter >> to do anything useful, please convince me that this is wrong. >> >> Hello, > > I didn't design the HAP codec, so my answer mostly follow the comments > of Tom Butterworth. (in the previous discussion of decoding/encoding)
But this isn't about the HAP codec, but about its representation within the existing FFmpeg framework. > Like it seems that the Hap Alpha Only is only design to be use > for alpha channel encoding But FFmpeg does not define "only alpha"... > (not to encode gray), it use in this new patch : RGBA > input/output (using only the alpha channel) ... so we have to choose which pix_fmt we can use to emulate "only alpha". I believe gray is not only the most expected one but also the one that makes further work easier than RGBA (that is not "only alpha" either). > In a more general way, HAP is only useful when use with GPU > decoding/compositing (specially in very big resolution, with lot > of video layer) > (not the case in the ffmpeg). Ok. > IMO, the ffmpeg support is mostly interesting to convert hap > file to something else or to check what we can encode with > the ffmpeg hap encoder. I don't disagree (on the contrary), I believe we should make it as easy as possible for users to work with it: Do you believe that it would be easier for users if HAP alpha only is represented as FFmpeg RGBA or gray? Thank you, Carl Eugen _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
