[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Warn about PAFF & Spatial
Wed Jul 23 21:22:27 CEST 2008
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 11:44:26AM -0700, Serguei Miridonov wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 July 2008, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:45:16AM -0700, Serguei Miridonov wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 23 July 2008, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 08:02:01AM -0700, Serguei Miridonov
> > > > > On Wednesday 23 July 2008, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > > > If i knew where the problem is exactly i would fix it.
> > > > > > Besides i honestly dont care about PAFF & MBAFF at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > Michael, I do not ask you why just because this is a
> > > > > developing list. But could you please post a few links which
> > > > > you think best explain pro and contra of 24/p video? For me
> > > > > 60/i video looks much much smoother than 24/p. On TV or
> > > > > computer monitor -- does not matter. So,if 24/p is so good,
> > > > > what I do wrong with 24/p video captured by my camcorder?
> > > >
> > > > then use 60/p
> > >
> > > Camcorder does not support that. So?
> > Complain to the company that made it ...
> You are so kind. Thank you.
What did you expect?
"Ill spend 1+ weeks and fix the bugs that i dont care about at all"
Why dont you fix the bug? Or help cleaning up h264.c if first is too
And seriously, if enough people complain about the lack of proper
progressive support in camcorders, maybe the industry will eventually
And its a good idea even with all the *AFF code working.
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel