On 4/17/20, Mark Filipak <markfilipak.windows+ffm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Another cogent point: > > Suppose I put 'datascope' before a filter that would pass the original frame > (say, based on a > color), but that the filter won't pass the 'scope' image (because it doesn't > contain that color). I > haven't tried it, but I'll bet that the 'scope' image doesn't appear at all > and that the frame is > dropped. > > (Note that if I moved the 'datascope' to after the filter, it would work as > expected.) > > Supposing that I'm correct, and considering the prior experiments that I did > conduct, the > non-recursive nature of ffmpeg filter complexes is an important > architectural feature that's not > documented. > > Understand that I'm not criticizing ffmpeg. ffmpeg works how it works and > that's fine. It just > doesn't work like an oscilloscope. It could have been designed to work like > an oscilloscope, but it > wasn't. That's okay, but it really should be documented. > > Do you agree, Paul, or am I mistaken?
Tried this simple command? ffmpeg -f lavfi -i testsrc2 -f lavfi -i testsrc -lavfi "[0:v]select='mod(n,2)'[a];[1:v]select='1-mod(n,2)'[b];[a][b]interleave" -f null - Interleave filter use frame pts/timestamps for picking frames. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
