On 12/10/17, Nicolas George <geo...@nsup.org> wrote: > Paul B Mahol (2017-12-10): >> For increased tempo it have much better quality. >> For decreased tempo is have similar quality. >> >> Also it have more options and is more configurable >> and have increased range of tempo scaling. > > Is there any benefit in atempo, then? > > If not, then this filter should replace atempo, but keeping the name, > and as much as possible the options, for maximum convenience for users.
That is very extreme step, if you insist on such step. Could you please change your statement? _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
