On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 11:06:17AM +0200, Paul B Mahol wrote: >>>> The above picture pretty clearly shows otherwise...? Could you tell me >>>> where my confusion would lie? >>> The filter option amount/angle set is very small. >> It's the default value. Could you recommend a command line? > Unless you want to propose patch, no.
OK, so the defaults create a broken image, and you're not willing to tell me what parameters to use without me proposing a patch? (What would that patch do?) I tried setting angle=50, and got http://storage.sesse.net/ffmpeg-radialblur2.png which looks more like a radial blur, but still is broken. Note the strong aliasing (starburst) in the center, the jagged thick white lines (more aliasing) on the left and right sides, and the fact that the vertical white lines are all but gone. If a blur creates strong high-frequency components (ie., the very opposite of what a blur is supposed to do), it is a strong signal that the algorithm chosen is just fundamentally wrong. /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: https://www.sesse.net/ _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
