Hiya,
I think you and Romildo are suffering from similar problems. (And I just got Romildo's post, too --- the re-ordering and delays on the Sourceforge lists are really crazy these days.) >> >I tried to use some automatic guesses from y4mscaler, but they did not >> >do what's IMHO right. >> a) What is the sample aspect ratio of your source stream? > >16:9 This is the *display* aspect ratio, not the *sample* aspect ratio (also known as the pixel aspect ratio). y4mscaler needs to know the shape of the pixels to do anything useful. I have an item on my TODO list, "Think about adding a 'dar=' option", which would allow specifying the DAR instead of the SAR --- but this is not as simple as it sounds at first glance. The problem is that most of the time, the DAR is a 'suggestion' rather than a reliable exact value. For example, 720x480 streams from DV and DVD which are "4:3" are actually slightly wider than 4:3. My best suggestion right now is to check out http://www.mir.com/DMG/aspect.html and then calculate the SAR of these streams by hand and give that to y4mscaler via "-I sar=W:H". >> I didn't see "10/11" anywhere in your calculations, which leads me to >> think that the bug probably belongs to you, not y4mscaler. :) > >I don't know about "10/11", but I know, that if my source is 640x352, >then I don't want an active source area that is smaller. Also, I want a >full letterboxed NTSC frame as result. This is what I tried: Thomas: 352 is a strange vertical size --- I would guess that this was cropped from a 640x480 stream, and then I would guess that the SAR was good old 1:1. Romildo: 544x304 is a very strange framesize. You say it should have roughly a 4:3 display aspect ratio? Hmm... then it seems like it has roughly a 3:4 pixel aspect ratio. Not a common SAR. (It's a shame that mplayer isn't suppling the SAR to y4mscaler in the stream header --- but maybe it doesn't really know either.) Please tell me if this all works out for you guys. -matt m. ps: Thomas, about the bounces: It turns out it was actually the mir.com server rejecting mail from *your* server. One of the servers that your email is routed through is listed as an open multi-hop relay (meaning that it is relaying mail for some other machine which is an open relay). Maybe it is not good to reject multi-hop open relays (I'm thinking it over), but maybe you might also want to complain to your service provider. > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > (reason: 550-http://dsbl.org/listing?ip=81.169.145.166) > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- >... while talking to mailhost.mir.com.: 81.169.145.166 is the "bad" server in the chain... ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Mjpeg-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
