On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 08:08:40PM -0800, Neil Birkbeck wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Neil Birkbeck <neil.birkb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > >> > >> If you are searching for a case where the patch makes a difference > >> one is: > >> ./ffmpeg -i ~/tickets/4493/AVCI100.mov out.nut > >> file should be here: > >> http://samples.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg-bugs/trac/ticket524/ > >> > >> if you want more cases that change, ill see if i can find more > >> > > > > Perfect, thanks Michael. Let me check those samples out.
there are 2 more in 2939 which change: https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/2939 > > > > > For that sample, I feel like it may be incorrectly tagged as pc/full. is it stored in the file or taken from: ff_generate_avci_extradata() maybe theres a bug in the AVCIntra handling > Looking at the histogram of the original there is no data in low range and > a peak due to clipping near where you'd expect higher up for studio/mpeg > range > ffplay /tmp/AVCI100.mov -vf histogram > > And scaling, treating the input as studio/mpeg and outputting full range, > stretches y to cover the entire range: > ffplay /tmp/AVCI100.mov -vf > scale=-1:-1:in_range=mpeg:out_range=jpeg,format=yuv422p10le,histogram > > This is a real concern though. I don't have a good feel for how many higher > bit depth files are incorrectly labelled as pc/full. > > Here is a comparison of what I was described in the commit log. > > > > The naming of the files images are > > ${pixfmt}_${scaled}_${in_range}_${out_range} > > for with/without the patch: > > https://rawgit.com/nbirkbeck/ffmpeg-test-samples/master/ > > color-range/results/report.html > > > > My concern was the yuv444p10_${scaled}_jpeg_mpeg (explicit settings), give > > different results than the implicit yuv444p10_unscaled_unspec_mpeg ones for > > high bit depth. And the high bit depth is results are in general different > > than the low bit depth ones. > > > > Report generated with: > > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nbirkbeck/ffmpeg-test- > > samples/master/color-range/run.sh Can you turn this into a fate test ? > > Using these test files: > > https://github.com/nbirkbeck/ffmpeg-test-samples/tree/ > > master/color-range/data > > > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB When you are offended at any man's fault, turn to yourself and study your own failings. Then you will forget your anger. -- Epictetus
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
