[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Warn about PAFF & Spatial

Michael Niedermayer michaelni
Fri May 30 18:02:50 CEST 2008

On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 09:12:40AM -0600, Loren Merritt wrote:
> On Thu, 29 May 2008, Jeff Downs wrote:
> >
> > The warning for interlaced + spatial direct was (accidentally I think)
> > removed in r11806 when MBAFF + spatial direct was implemented.
> > So I am for restoring it as per the patch.
> Not accidental. I removed the warning because I was unaware of any 
> difference between PAFF direct and MBAFF direct, and I still don't see 
> anywhere in the standard that they differ.

hmm, then maybe i was wrong, i assumed that there was a difference
mainly because of various "fixmes" in h264.c and
that your commit which implemented spatial direct + interlacing did explicitly
mention MBAFF but not PAFF

Either way, if spatial-direct-PAFF is supposed to work then we are back to the
question why some files with it do not work ...


Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

I wish the Xiph folks would stop pretending they've got something they
do not.  Somehow I fear this will remain a wish. -- M?ns Rullg?rd
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20080530/b87c2adf/attachment.pgp>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list