Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote on Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 02:27:38PM +0000: > Martin Cracauer <cracauer <at> cons.org> writes: > > > However, I don't seem to be able to "grab" the output of > > the reencoding. So to speak there is no name given to > > it to then use in a second filter_complex. > > This is correct.
Thanks, Carl. Much appreciated. Out of curiosity, is there ever a need for a second filter_complex? Is there anything that ffmpeg can do that you cannot put into a filter_complex so that you then have to have a second one after the non-filter-complex statement? (and where you can actually grab the output of same in the second -fc) > > #! /bin/sh > > Just a general remark: > When you ask for support on this mailing list, please > (test current FFmpeg git head and) provide your actual > (simplified) command line together with the complete, > uncut console output, no scripts please. Will do. Looking at it it has a couple of annoying indirections that you don't notice after a while but that make bad mailing list content. I was using git from yesterday. Working spendidly, BTW. Very happy and it was a fun fight for the screenshots. Martin -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer <craca...@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
