they do
At least my Sony does
E.
> Some (most?) DV camcorders will function as
> a analog->digital converter (at least in NTSC countries - not sure
> about PAL).
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Sybase ASE Linux Expre
On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 07:24, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> I've found, and maybe others will chime in, DV very easy to work with -
> you've got _1_ choice of frame size/quality/whatever, no worries
> about field order (DV is bottom field first. Period), and the DV
> converter
Here are two more problems that I discovered while working with
glav/lavplay:
* When you play a very short avi with glav, glav exits when playing is
finished. When you play longer avi files, glav stays open and I can edit
the video. This should also be possible for short avi files.
* You can't
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Well, sync is built into the DV format. The problem with DV is, that it
And you don't need a separate sound card per capture device (in the
event you have more than one).
Then too there is the 'locked audio' aspect of DV (wh
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 01:53:01PM +0200, Dik Takken wrote:
>
> Here are two more problems that I discovered while working with
> glav/lavplay:
>
>
> * Simple MPlayer-style keyboard control. Using the arrow keys to seek,
> space as pause toggle and use the arrow keys to seek frame-by-frame whe
Hallo
Sorry, if I write something alreaddy mentioned.
> > Exactly. The code for capturing in mjpegtools is a relatively small
> > portion of the total - the bulk of the code resides in the (wide)
> > variety of filters (couple denoisers, medianfilter, stabilizer, and
> > s
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:36:39 -0700 (PDT)
"Steven M. Schultz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Huh? It's just 12GB/hour - quite comparable to the high
> quality full frame mode that MJPEG cards produce (or so I was
> told at one time
Yup, full-frame PAL captured with my Marvel takes
Hello,
I noticed something strange while playing with mpeg2enc. When I encode a
sequence of frames to progressive mpeg2, the output quality is *much*
better than when I encode the same image sequence to progressive mpeg2.
It seems to me that something must be wrong here. I use these
options for
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Dik Takken wrote:
> I noticed something strange while playing with mpeg2enc. When I encode a
> sequence of frames to progressive mpeg2, the output quality is *much*
> better than when I encode the same image sequence to progressive mpeg2.
Something does not
On Tue, 2004-10-26 at 07:57, Bernhard Praschinger wrote:
> Hallo
>
> > I am trying to capture a VHS PAL film using a DC10+ card (Pinnacle).
> > The capture works fine, but I have to move the bottom field forward in
> > order to get the correct pair of fields in the same frame. This works
> > fine
Derek Fountain wrote:
Just as a matter of interest, what are the principal uses, if any, of the
MJPEG Tools to someone who doesn't have a supported capture card?
You don't have to capture with the mjpegtools -- I never have (all my
captures are DV through a Canopus box on FireWire). Cap
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Dik Takken wrote:
I noticed something strange while playing with mpeg2enc. When I encode a
sequence of frames to progressive mpeg2, the output quality is *much*
better than when I encode the same image sequence to progressive mpeg2.
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004, Dik Takken wrote:
> Sorry, lame mistake. Rephrase:
:)
> Ok, thanks for pointing that out. Should -q 2 be safe enough? The thing is
It might be. And you might be lucky enough to not encounter the
artifacting - it's dependent on the material to a de
13 matches
Mail list logo
