2018-12-17 21:52 GMT+01:00, Jan Ekström <jee...@gmail.com>: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 10:49 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> 2018-12-17 21:30 GMT+01:00, Jan Ekström <jee...@gmail.com>: >> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 10:23 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> 2018-12-17 21:17 GMT+01:00, Jan Ekström <jee...@gmail.com>: >> >> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 3:47 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> 2018-12-17 7:58 GMT+01:00, Jan Ekström <jee...@gmail.com>: >> >> >> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018, 03:02 Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com >> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> 2018-12-17 1:58 GMT+01:00, Jan Ekström <jee...@gmail.com>: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > So as far as it's been possible to test this, that's been done >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Could you point me to a dva1 sample? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I have not seen any dolby vision samples with avc in the wild. >> >> >> > You can ask Vittorio if he has some as he noted about >> >> >> > possibly being able to ask for some before. >> >> >> >> >> >> The patch is of course ok if Vittorio tested it with his samples. >> >> >> >> >> >> Thank you, Carl Eugen >> >> > >> >> > Unfortunately I have no idea what samples Vittorio does or does not >> >> > possess, he has only mentioned off-hand that he might able to get >> >> > hold >> >> > of some if required. And since you were the one requiring them, I >> >> > pointed you towards him. >> >> > >> >> > For myself, I am happy with the following points regarding this: >> >> > 1. The identifiers are registered at the MPEG-4 RA. >> >> > 2. There is a proper specification for these mappings that is >> >> > seemingly kept up-to-date. >> >> > 3. The mappings specification specifically notes that the only >> >> > difference between the AVC and HEVC identifiers are the semantics >> >> > mentioned in ISO/IEC 14496-15. We already have all of the identifiers >> >> > specified which these mappings are based upon, so those semantics >> >> > should not matter to us (and if they do, we have already broken those >> >> > constraints at this point). >> >> > 4. The mapping specification specifically notes that the given AVC >> >> > and >> >> > HEVC identifiers must also include the standard avcC and hvcC boxes >> >> > so >> >> > that they can be decoded normally without any additional custom code. >> >> > 5. We have samples for at least one of the four identifiers that >> >> > matches points 1 to 4. >> >> > 6. Android, Chromium, VLC among others have already implemented these >> >> > identifiers in the same way. >> >> > >> >> > Now, if you are not happy with these points, then please clearly >> >> > state >> >> > that you are blocking any and all additional identifier additions - >> >> > no >> >> >> >> > matter how specified - as long as there are no samples on hand for >> >> > them. >> >> >> >> I thought we had samples? >> >> >> >> Anyway, please mention ticket #7347. >> > >> > The sample last linked in that ticket was supposedly MPEG-TS for the >> > other HEVC identifier, not ISOBMFF. >> >> Why do you think so? Which sample did you test? >> > > From #7347 >> Dobly Vision transport stream with codec tag "dvhe" can be found under: >> http://4kmedia.org/tag/dolby-vision/ > > The site also notes that it's supposed to be a transport stream. I did > not look further.
Then please allow me to once again suggest testing (at least if you trust neither me nor Igor). Carl Eugen _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
