On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 10:42:27AM -0500, Neil Radisch wrote: > Ok, I think I've narrowed the problem down. It seems to be a problem > with the implementation of parity. > > If you recall, parity=0 gives me slightly jerky motion and parity=1 gives > me very bad motion for 29.97 interlaced material. > > Well, just for laughs I played with 23.976 material, which normally plays > very well. Now parity shouldn't have any effect here since the base material > isn't interlaced. The results are curious. > > fieldparity=0 - slightly jerky > fieldparity=1 - slightly jerky > no parity specified - perfect!!!!!!! > > What this implies is that the setting of parity has a detrimental effect > on playback. Perhaps the slightly jerky motion is not an interlace artifact > in this case, but just a rendering delay caused by the code that implements > parity?
That is possible. Sleeping is bad for performance. This used to be a problem on slower machines even without fieldparity but triple buffering fixed that. -- Ville Syrj�l� [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sci.fi/~syrjala/ -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe directfb-users" as subject.
