On 2015-11-02 12:12, Moritz Barsnick wrote: > On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 20:36:54 +0100, Henk D. Schoneveld wrote: >> On 30 Oct 2015, at 03:40, Joel Lopez <badassmexi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 1. Single or 2-pass encoding? I'm reading quality isn't affected >>> much and that it may be possible to have aligned key frames with >>> either one. What do you guys do? >> 2-pass in my opinion only makes sense when the resulting file has to be >> stored max-quality to finite storage medium. CD/DVD etc. >> Do some testing and look what % is saved and relate to the extra time/energy >> invested in that 2nd pass. > > I think the point was to use two-pass encoding in order to use the > intermediate analysis file for various second-pass conversions > (resolutions, qualities), so that those would result in the same key > frame locations. This was suggested on "the net" somewhere (Wowza?). I > neither know whether it is valid to do the second pass with differing > resolutions, nor whether the key frame locations are absolutely > determined by the first pass. (Does the first pass analysis determine > those positions?)
libx264 definitely supports changing resolution between first and later passes. It also determines frame types in the first pass.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
