Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH]Do not ask for mxf samples with unknown field dominance
On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 09:03 +0100, tim nicholson wrote: On 10/09/14 21:45, Tomas Härdin wrote: On Tue, 2014-08-19 at 22:30 +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote: On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 01:30:24AM +0200, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: Hi! Attached patch removes a request for samples of which we already have several that all work fine. field_dominance can have 256 different values, do we have samples for all ? do they even exist ? Whilst the variable may be able to contain 256 different values in reality there are only two possible states f1 first or f2 first. As far as I recall there are only two (1, 2) and possibly unknown (0). Is there a distinction between unknown and progressive? I don't have the numbers to hand. Unknown means unknown. If it's an optional field it probably means the muxer that made the file is crap, which is not uncommon. /Tomas signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH]Do not ask for mxf samples with unknown field dominance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/09/14 21:45, Tomas Härdin wrote: On Tue, 2014-08-19 at 22:30 +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote: On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 01:30:24AM +0200, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: Hi! Attached patch removes a request for samples of which we already have several that all work fine. field_dominance can have 256 different values, do we have samples for all ? do they even exist ? Whilst the variable may be able to contain 256 different values in reality there are only two possible states f1 first or f2 first. As far as I recall there are only two (1, 2) and possibly unknown (0). Is there a distinction between unknown and progressive? I don't have the numbers to hand. /Tomas [..] - -- Tim. Key Fingerprint 38CF DB09 3ED0 F607 8B67 6CED 0C0B FC44 8B0B FC83 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUF+7lAAoJEAwL/ESLC/yD914H/j1iF4mec8zkiVQeySSOOkB+ mebCr5yNhwuYDGQvzCp15nVpLi1y/uyP0TCu+iCJp/pDHR+z8iSO6moKhY+hB0hp 3395I22SujmSa8ODY9NWTrZWqAKnS0Lohfkzva04Tvn31cLskWpQKxPWhBajz0dP d9G4h9O9YhsVBH1L/UhRHRDwDSeghqjTvnw3U63DoGRitFCKZAARATx0O7iH51Xv we3Mk7FAgpWfB5GVQ3VQZWkzydsoQZNjtWnGp4kjnqdONOMY8H6EbiqeQuCY2Tfs yu6OX5KowMAv7YfCrU0J1BlTsl90AA9Rh3KEFhHTjvI75KhAW0KL6x1Oxuz4XcU= =hjO4 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH]Do not ask for mxf samples with unknown field dominance
On Tue, 2014-08-19 at 22:30 +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote: On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 01:30:24AM +0200, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: Hi! Attached patch removes a request for samples of which we already have several that all work fine. field_dominance can have 256 different values, do we have samples for all ? do they even exist ? As far as I recall there are only two (1, 2) and possibly unknown (0). /Tomas signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH]Do not ask for mxf samples with unknown field dominance
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 01:30:24AM +0200, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: Hi! Attached patch removes a request for samples of which we already have several that all work fine. field_dominance can have 256 different values, do we have samples for all ? do they even exist ? is the st-codec-field_order set correctly for them ? or is it somehow not applicable ? [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB In fact, the RIAA has been known to suggest that students drop out of college or go to community college in order to be able to afford settlements. -- The RIAA signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH]Do not ask for mxf samples with unknown field dominance
Hi! Attached patch removes a request for samples of which we already have several that all work fine. Please comment, Carl Eugendiff --git a/libavformat/mxfdec.c b/libavformat/mxfdec.c index 7a4633f..aabae69 100644 --- a/libavformat/mxfdec.c +++ b/libavformat/mxfdec.c @@ -1603,9 +1603,6 @@ static int mxf_parse_structural_metadata(MXFContext *mxf) st-codec-field_order = AV_FIELD_BB; break; default: -avpriv_request_sample(mxf-fc, - Field dominance %d support, - descriptor-field_dominance); break; } /* Turn field height into frame height. */ ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
