On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 09:15:13 +0100 Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/9/18, wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 21:53:48 -0300 > > James Almer <jamr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 3/8/2018 9:50 PM, Hazem Ashmawy wrote: > >> > [PATCH] avfilter: add panorama filter > >> > > >> > Sorry about that! I removed them now. > >> > For the future, any recommendation for a tool for linting / checking > >> > formating > >> > rules? > >> > >> There's tools/patcheck. Feed it a git format-patch style of patch to > >> find common issues, but keep in mind it can generate a lot of false > >> positives. > >> > >> I don't know if we have documentation about actual formatting rules > >> anywhere. > > > > Also: > > > > <_jamrial> shouldn't that panorama filter sent to the ml use the spherical > > frame side data? > > > > I think so. > > Are there actual files that have such data? Is that a trick question? I only know the non-standard, Google specific metadata in mkv and mp4 that lavf can read (was any of this standardized yet?). But that doesn't change that we can tag AVFrames with this info, and for files which don't have the metadata, it makes sense to me to set it with a new vf_format argument or some sort of vf_setinfo (if we don't have anything like this yet). The part that is annoying is that vf_panorama still seems to require setting an output projection, which would make the whole thing more annoying instead of less, but even then I'd argue it should default to taking the AVFrame configuration (AV_FRAME_DATA_SPHERICAL) as input by default, even if the filter arguments can override it. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
