On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 7:07 PM Mark Filipak <markfilipak.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28/05/2025 15.04, Paul B Mahol wrote: > > On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 7:00 PM Mark Filipak <markfilipak.i...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > >> Why does the 'detelecine' filter exist? It is weak and clumsy. > >> > >> The 'fieldmatch' filter followed by 'decimate' do a better job and are > >> robust. > >> > >> By continuing to carry obsolete filters, FFmpeg emasculates itself. That > >> makes FFmpeg appear to be > >> chaotic and ties up names that could be, should be reused to better > effect. > >> > >> The same could be written about many FFmpeg filters. Dump them, or > create > >> a "Legacy" category in the > >> documentation and put them there. Also, include documentation in > "Legacy" > >> that shows how to replace > >> the obsolete filters in existing scripts. Promote the best filters, not > >> the worst. > >> > > > > You are extremely biased and unhelpful. > > Paul, do you _ever_ use 'detelecine'? > Nope. > > > What other filters you want to purge and why? > > Shall we, together, begin a list? > Just you, please! > > > _______________________________________________ > 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". > _______________________________________________ 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".
