On 4/21/19, Nicolas George <geo...@nsup.org> wrote: > I apperciate the efforts to reply more than half a line. > > Paul B Mahol (12019-04-21): >> It is not kind of resampling. Resampling is specific and belongs to >> separate library. > > There is no doubt it IS a kind of resampling: it is in the name. The > question is whether is it specific enough to warrant a separate > interface.
https://dspguru.com/dsp/faqs/multirate/resampling/ Resampling involves interpolation. If I do resampling with aresample and resampling with factor 2 from 44100 to 88200 I can see there is still some spectrum data in highest frequencies. > >> The oversampling is another thing, and doing only upsampling/downsampling >> via libswresample is fragile/incomplete, as you need some kind of >> lowpass. >> (be it IIR, FIR or simple FFT) after upsample and before downsample. > > There are various way of doing a resampling with various properties. > This is just another one. If you haven't noticed, this is just upsampling/downsampling without lowpass. And that is not resampling in any way. > >> That is why it best fit into lavfi because it is just one block of >> processing with multiple solutions. > > Making it a separate filter is the easy solution, but not the good one. > It is reporting all the choices to later or the end user. That makes for > easy quick code now, but terrible use later. That is just your opinion now, you need to provide technical terms to support your statements. > >> Also how that could be exported? It does not belong there. > > Options. We already have them, just add a few. And in that case, it > becomes accessible for all filters. Another option to aresample filter would just confuse users. Two options which would set rate with completely different outcome. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".