On 02/04/2021 10:54 PM, Jim DeLaHunt wrote:
Thanks, Jim,
On 2021-02-04 15:50, Mark Filipak (ffmpeg) wrote:
For discussion: A better video notation.
[email protected] (aka "24p") Cinema (i.e. 24PPS) mastered at 23.9FPS, 0.1%
slow.
[email protected] (aka "30i") Soft-telecined: cinema with 29.9FPS metadata,
0.1% slow.
The notation codes for these two examples look identical to me.
They _are_ identical. A soft-telecined video is actually 23.9fps but with 29.9fps metadata. In other
words, you wouldn't want to detelecine it, eh?
Perhaps the second one should have been "[email protected]"?
Also, I'll point out that that this notation seems to have an obfuscation of its own, when it says
"23.9". Does that actually mean "24/1.001"? ...
You know, I'm kinda ambivalent. Of course, 24/1.001fps needs to be differentiated from 24fps, but
I'm not sure 24fps actually exists on any DVD or BD. That 'said', I originally used '/1.001' but I
thought that it added nothing other than that it's not 24fps or 30fps or 60fps. Now, it's a fact
that there are several players and software packages that use '23fps' and '29fps' and '59fps'. I
understand why they do that though I don't like it much and first thought it was an error. I thought
that '23.9', '29.9', and '59.9' was a good compromise. But I'm pretty agnostic on the whole issue.
Let's see what consensus emerges.
... It would be nice if the notation said that, so that we
could distinguish it from the number, "239/10".
Best regards,
—Jim DeLaHunt
--
I don't have a dog.
And furthermore, my dog doesn't bite.
And furthermore, you provoked him.
_______________________________________________
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".
