Michael Niedermayer wrote: >To clarify my suggestion, >the algorithm should be tuned for high bit depth before using >it for long term storage. This would be v4 (or later). >Personally i would wait for v4 and not use v3 for high bit >depth. Which is why i think its not smart to extend the v3 >implementation with more high depth support.
The issue is that in the real world we need to use the format now. Otherwise the film archives must use MXF/DPX instead of Матрёшка/FFV1. That's the point! I presented to the industry this solution in August 2016 at "The Reel Thing" technical symposium in Hollywood, and an article on it was published in April 2017 in FIAF's "Journal of Film Preservation". The archives cannot wait forever! And they are indeed important users of FFmpeg, in my opinion. I already paid EUR 7000 for the FFV1 use in the archival world, and will pay EUR 5000 additionally in the next months. >IIUC people created such files somehow beliving that the IMO >clear warning somehow suggested that this was stable. And with >that we are a bit stuck with this for v3 I presented last November at the "No Time to Wait" symposium (nomen est omen) in Vienna - i.e. in your city - how we have to work today and how we hope to modify container and codec during the next data migration. Last but not least, since almost two years now it's impossible to work on the development of FFV1 v4. It's always the wrong time and/or the wrong place every time I am doing something for this cause. Why? This is extremely frustrating. Best regards, Reto _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
