Mark Filipak wrote: > On 17/07/2024 13.23, Oliver Fromme wrote: > > Mark Filipak wrote: > > > What if there's no such thing as frame in the future? Just think about > > > it. > > > > What are you going to use instead? > > Pels.
Pel is just another name for pixel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel I assume that's not what you mean, do you? > > You somehow need to organize screen updates -- that is, when the > > contents of the screen change. You have to describe the change > > somehow, and attach a time stamp to that change. > > That's exactly what a frame is. > > I respectfully say that frame is a relic of film frames carried over to > other visual media. I > respectfully claim that video doesn't have to be, and shouldn't be, serial > photography by another name. > > > A video is just a sequence of screen updates. No more, no less. > > As every update is a frame, a video has to be a sequence of frames. > > Does it? Frames are sequences of individually static pictures that are each > populated by arrays of > static pixels. No. In the context of video compression (such as MPEG), a frame is a unit that is part of a video, and that describes what to do in order to arrive at the desired screen contents associated with a certain time stamp. A frame does *not* have to be an individual picture. It may well consist of just a single macroblock (in H.264 terms), or even be completely empty. In the case of variable frame rate, an empty frame may be omitted altogether, saving a few bytes of header data. I almost suspect we both mean the same thing, but you refuse to call it a frame. :-) In that case, the alternative that you're looking for already exists, and it's being used all the time. It's still called "frame", though. Best regards -- Oliver _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
