Hey, Ted,
On 04/17/2020 03:52 AM, Ted Park wrote:
Hi,
What do you mean?
split[A] select='not(eq(mod(n+1\,5)\,3))' [C]interleave
[B]split[D]select='eq(mod(n+1\,5)\,2)'[F]blend[D]
[E]select='eq(mod(n+1\,5)\,3)'[G]
I created the filtergraph by hand. I don't know what folks expect, but since duplicating pads
(e.g., "[A] [A]") just takes up space, I didn't duplicate them. I don't know whether that
relates to "reuse filter pad labels". Could you put some 'meat' on your 'bones'?
I meant using D twice.
How would I use D twice? What do you have in mind? Can you draw a picture? I'm
a picture-guy.
I thought it might create a cycle or something but since the first pair of [D]
were linked to each other I guess that means you could use it again for blend's
output pad.
D already is 'blend's output pad.
For the actual filter though, should it look better on a 60Hz vertical refresh
panel than 120Hz? I don't fully understand the rationale, but I was curious and
tried it, on film material I can't tell the difference but animation looks
horrible at 120Hz (like I'm dizzy, like a slow motion blur effect at regular
speed?) but it's fine at 60Hz.
A p24-to-p120 is a no brainer: 120/24 = 5, therefore, a simple 5x frame repeat. But what about folks
who don't have 120Hz TVs?
A p24-to-p60 is problematic: 60/24 = 2.5, therefore, a telecine.
A p24-to-p30-to-p60 is a 23 pull-down telecine followed by 2x frame repeat.
It's awful.
A p24-to-p60 55 pull-down telecine is far superior, but players and TVs don't do that -- at least,
MPV and/or my TV don't do it.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[email protected] with subject "unsubscribe".
