On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, Matto Marjanovic wrote:
> Oh, how mortifying --- I added the CVD preset a month ago, but I guess
> I did not do a great job testing it.
Ah, ok - it was a Bug. Thought for a second (but only 1 second ;))
that CVDs were supposed to be letterboxed
> (Thankfu
...
>> o The sinc kernels are now called 'sinc' and are parameterized,
>> e.g. "sinc:8" is a sinc truncated to 8-cycles.
>
> Is there any sanity checking on the value - protect against meaning
> 8 but giving 88 (keybounce ;))?
Nope.
But, the factor of 14 difference in proce
Hi!
> The 3059 value is exactly the sum of the audio and video bitrates,
> calculated by the ripmake script. Maybe this ripmake script should
> be changed to add this 1-2% margin to the calculated bitrate.
Oh, it should be changed A LOT! :-)))
If you really want to improve ripmake to the point th
> With a letterbox effect - cool! But not what I had in mind ;)
Oh, how mortifying --- I added the CVD preset a month ago, but I guess
I did not do a great job testing it.
...
> INFO: [y4mscaler] === TARGET parameters: =
> INFO: [y4mscaler] > stream:
> INFO: [y4
>I just put v0.6.0 of y4mscaler on-line at http://www.mir.com/DMG/Software/
Make that v0.6.1 --- which fixes a bug in the CVD preset.
>New features:
>
> o Added the "CVD" preset.
> o Enhance 'norm' detection to recognize film/field framerates.
> o The sinc kernels are now called 'sinc' and
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Matto Marjanovic wrote:
> o Added the "CVD" preset.
With a letterbox effect - cool! But not what I had in mind ;)
I took a brief clip from the D8 capture - 720x480 bottom first, all
that and used "-O preset=CVD".What I thought would happen was
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Matto Marjanovic wrote:
> I just put v0.6.0 of y4mscaler on-line at http://www.mir.com/DMG/Software/
> o Added the "CVD" preset.
Super!
> o The sinc kernels are now called 'sinc' and are parameterized,
> e.g. "sinc:8" is a sinc truncated to 8-cycles.
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, Richard Ellis wrote:
>
> If you'd still like a piece of the capture, I'll gladly push some
> stuff your way. But, in further experimenting tonight I think I've
sure - go ahead and push it to the location I mentioned.
> found the culprit. If I drop the -Q 4.0 parame
