[FFmpeg-devel] [GSoC] Motion Interpolation

Clément Bœsch u at pkh.me
Mon Aug 29 09:46:05 EEST 2016

On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:31:10AM +0200, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Robert Krüger <krueger at lesspain.software>
> wrote:
> >
> > what is the way to best contribute with test cases? I have two samples that
> > I use for testing, so far the results look very, very promising but there
> > are still a few artefact problems, so these could maybe serve as a good
> > test case. In some cases the artefacts almost certainly look like there is
> > a bug in motion vector calculation as a very large area suddenly begins to
> > move in which really only a small part is/should be moving.
> >
> > How do I make this available to you or other devs at this stage? Just trac
> > tickets or is it too early for that and you would like to work on this
> > differently? After all it is always a grey area, when this can be
> > considered solved, as it is a process of gradual improvements, so maybe
> > it's not well-suited for a ticket.
> >
> > Let me know. Happy to contribute samples and some testing time here and
> > there.
> You can provide them either publicly or privately to any of devs interested.
> I'm always interested in short samples exhibiting the problem.

Using http://b.pkh.me/sfx-sky.mov and comparing:

  ./ffplay -flags2 +export_mvs sfx-sky.mov -vf codecview=mv=pf


  ./ffplay sfx-sky.mov -vf mestimate,codecview=mv=pf

The encoded mvs looks much more meaningful that the ones found with
mestimate. Typically, if you're looking for a global motion of some sort,
the "native" mvs makes much more clear that there is a mostly static area
at the bottom and a panning one on top with its direction pretty obvious.
With mestimate, it just looks like small noise. Any plan to improve this?

Clément B.

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list