On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 09:14, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> If you do that (and it has almost always improved the compression for
> me - sometimes quite substantially) then you may encounter playback
> difficulties with Ogle - seems they don't handle the dual prime
> motion esti
On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 06:14, Andrew Stevens wrote:
> -f 8 -E -10 -q 6 -R 0 -I 0 -K tmpgenc
Hmmm... I'm using 1.6.1.90 and i cannot find some options (-E, -10, -R)
in the man page nor in the --help output.
Are you using a recent CVS or something?
--
Florin Andrei
http://florin.myip.org/
---
On 11 Nov 2003, Florin Andrei wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 06:14, Andrew Stevens wrote:
>
> > -f 8 -E -10 -q 6 -R 0 -I 0 -K tmpgenc
>
> Hmmm... I'm using 1.6.1.90 and i cannot find some options (-E, -10, -R)
> in the man page nor in the --help output.
>
> Are you using a recent CVS or someth
On 11 Nov 2003, Florin Andrei wrote:
> So, essentially you're saying that MPEG2 without B-frames is perfectly
> legal from the DVD standards p.o.v., right?
They are, and always have been, optional. Nothing says that B
frames _must_ be used. In many cases they are a win but wit
Hi!
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 17:10, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> Main feature that 1.6.1.90 brought to the party was the -K option
> and libquicktime (instead of the old/incompatible quicktime4linux)
> support. Since then quite a few improvements have been made.
Yes, lots of n
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Alexei Dets wrote:
> Yes, lots of new features...
And a couple bugs ;)
> Can we expect a stable _release_ version anytime soon? Current CVS mjpegtools
Not at the moment, there are a couple issues (boundary cases that
most folks would not notice) tha
Hi,
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 22:53, Alexei Dets wrote:
> Can we expect a stable _release_ version anytime soon? Current CVS mjpegtools
> are FAR better than 1.6.1 but it is impossible to get it in the packaged form
> - all distributions are packaging the latest release... :-(((
Wink noted again. I
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Ronald Bultje wrote:
> If people think that yuvdenoise and mpeg2enc are "more than ready" for a
> stable release, I'll package a 1.6.1.91... Else, I'll wait a few days
> longer. ;).
yuvdenoise was a problem this past weekend on OS/X - but it is
working now af
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 13:53, Alexei Dets wrote:
>
> Can we expect a stable _release_ version anytime soon?
Or at least a 1.6.1.91 type of thing... ;-) When CVS seems healthy
enough for a partial release.
--
Florin Andrei
http://florin.myip.org/
--
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 13:07, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> On 11 Nov 2003, Florin Andrei wrote:
>
> > So, essentially you're saying that MPEG2 without B-frames is perfectly
> > legal from the DVD standards p.o.v., right?
>
> They are, and always have been, optional. Nothing says that B
>
> If people think that yuvdenoise and mpeg2enc are "more than ready" for a
> stable release, I'll package a 1.6.1.91... Else, I'll wait a few days
> longer. ;).
>
> Ronald
There was a problem reported a while back with post-1.6.1 yuvdenoise
(that is, after my 4:1:1 patches) producing some visual
On 11 Nov 2003, Florin Andrei wrote:
> What is _your_ source?
Which one? ;)
The author of mpeg2enc is one. Another can be found in one of
the links from http://www.mir.com/DMG/, go to the MPEG FAQ
and read http://tns-www.lcs.mit.edu/manuals/mpeg2/FAQ
12 matches
Mail list logo
