Roger Pack <rogerdpack2 <at> gmail.com> writes: > ffmpeg -i input -f rawvideo -f nut output.nut > > Using (or being able to use) "-f" > typically using two "-f" s would be an override. > But in this case it isn't. In fact, its using > "-f" to specify two entirely different aspects of > the output file.
I have no idea what this email is about (and it would be super-nice if you would not continue this thread) but please understand that in your command line the second -f is overriding the first -f option, so instead of being rawvideo, the output has format nut. (Which it would also have if you had not specified any "-f" option as the extension "nut" defaults to the format "nut".) Note that the input option "-r" is mostly a debug option with limited use and often does not work and that I consider it extremely useful that many input options (like -f) have the same name as the matching output options. Finally, I don't think there is anything wrong with having codecs with the same name as formats, this includes "opus", "mp3" and "rawvideo" (and many others). Carl Eugen _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user