On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 03:43:45PM -0700, Mike Melanson wrote: > What's the minimum level of quality an encoder should meet in order to be > included in the codebase? 2 items: > > 1) I wrote an Apple Graphics/SMC video encoder that operates on a lossless > principle rather than attempting to make any R/D decisions during vector > quantization. Should I bother submitting it?
Probably yes. > 2) There's a usable Cinepak encoder patch out there. It's chatty but it > does the job. I don't know about the overall quality but given the vintage > of the codec, the encoder is probably doing a good job. Should we push it > in? Maybe clean up/improve a bit. It's funnier for FFmpeg. About two years ago I've submitted a patch for M$ Video 1 (15-bit variant) encoder and Michael's review was in lines "it's horribly broken in principle". Now it's in FFmpeg codebase applied without any improvements (and none of my involvement too). _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
