On 04/25/2020 08:54 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
On 4/25/20, Mark Filipak <markfilipak.windows+ffm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 04/25/2020 05:15 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
On 4/25/20, Mark Filipak <markfilipak.windows+ffm...@gmail.com> wrote:
ffprobe reports:
frames.frame.0.interlaced_frame=0
frames.frame.0.top_field_first=1
frames.frame.0.repeat_pict=1
frames.frame.1.interlaced_frame=0
frames.frame.1.top_field_first=0
frames.frame.1.repeat_pict=0
frames.frame.2.interlaced_frame=0
frames.frame.2.top_field_first=0
frames.frame.2.repeat_pict=1
frames.frame.3.interlaced_frame=0
frames.frame.3.top_field_first=1
frames.frame.3.repeat_pict=0
Is there an ffmpeg way to zero those metadata flags in the input prior to
the decoder so that the
decoder thinks that the input is solely progressive?
No, are you now mixing filtering and decoding?
No. I wrote "prior to the decoder". Did you notice? In contrast to "prior to
the decoder", I assume
that filters operate on frames/fields/pixels prior to the output.
Just in case:
INPUT->[PARSER->]DEMUXER->[BITSTREAM_FILTER->]DECODER->FILTER->MUXER->ENCODER
Thanks so much. For an architecture guy like me, that process flow is pure
gold. May I ask more?
INPUT -- This means the command line, yes?
PARSER -- (optional? or would this be a parser that I would write?)
BITSTREAM_FILTER -- This would filter an MPEG stream, yes? I initially looked at 'mpeg2_metadata' to
manipulate the above metadata flags and was disappointed/bewildered that there is no such directive.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
