On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 05:49:04PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote: > > Clearly there are two very different directions and I don't think they > necessarily negate each other (although using pipes would probably stray > from what's specified by the bounty). > > 1. Allowing rendering to video and audio pipes (or a combined video/audio > pipe), and user-specified backgrounded command lines to process the > pipe(s) (e.g. the current yuv4mpegpipe-to-pipe rendering), is _very_ > flexible, but also quite user un-friendly. > > 2. Completely integrated DVD rendering will be much more user-friendly, > but will be much less flexible. > > > My opinion is Cinelerra would be a better tool with _both_ options. For > advanced users, rendering to pipes can be very useful (not just for DVD > rendering); you can run video or audio through external filters that > aren't available in cinelerra (e.g. yuvdenoise, yuvscaler, sox, etc.), > while the integrated option would be best for all new users and would > be a quick and hassle-free way to create a DVD.
Another option would be to allow so much settings when rendering that using a shell would not bring anything else compared to setting the parameters in Cinelerra. Unfortunately, there are so much parameters that the MPEG2 export settings window would look like an airplane cockpit! Nicolas, Paris. _______________________________________________ Cinelerra mailing list [email protected] https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
