Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Question about palette size in packets
On 02/27/2016 12:02 PM, Mats Peterson wrote: On 02/27/2016 11:51 AM, Mats Peterson wrote: On 02/27/2016 11:44 AM, Mats Peterson wrote: Michael, I am currently "assuming" that the size of the palette in a packet, if included at the end of the video data, will be 1 << bits_per_coded_sample. You're saying that the size of the packet isn't Should of course be "the size of the palette". ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Question about palette size in packets
On 02/27/2016 11:51 AM, Mats Peterson wrote: On 02/27/2016 11:44 AM, Mats Peterson wrote: Michael, I am currently "assuming" that the size of the palette in a packet, if included at the end of the video data, will be 1 << bits_per_coded_sample. You're saying that the size of the packet isn't fixed to 1024 bytes, but currently it seems to be 1024 (256 * 4) bytes exclusively. Will this possibly change in the future? If so, is the "1 << bits per sample" for the palette size that is already assumed decent enough to use as a future "standard"? Mats Instead of having to subtract the video data from the packet size every time, which I'm currently *not* doing, but which of course would be more fool-proof. This is mostly related to the muxer side, when calculating the palette size after returning from ff_reshuffle_raw_rgb(), by the way. Mats -- Mats Peterson http://matsp888.no-ip.org/~mats/ ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Question about palette size in packets
On 02/27/2016 11:44 AM, Mats Peterson wrote: Michael, I am currently "assuming" that the size of the palette in a packet, if included at the end of the video data, will be 1 << bits_per_coded_sample. You're saying that the size of the packet isn't fixed to 1024 bytes, but currently it seems to be 1024 (256 * 4) bytes exclusively. Will this possibly change in the future? If so, is the "1 << bits per sample" for the palette size that is already assumed decent enough to use as a future "standard"? Mats Instead of having to subtract the video data from the packet size every time, which I'm currently *not* doing, but which of course would be more fool-proof. -- Mats Peterson http://matsp888.no-ip.org/~mats/ ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
