On 11/22/2011 01:00 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Kostya Shishkov > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 08:01:38PM -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: >>> --- >>> libavutil/pixdesc.c | 80 >>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> libavutil/pixfmt.h | 11 +++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> The naming is slightly silly IMO (even though GBR411 does make sense and is >> called Bayer filter ;). What about calling it simply PIX_FMT_GBR_P ? > > My thought was basically to support these also... I don't mind using > more generic names if people want though. Others have similar > opinions?
Calling them 444 does seem somewhat unneeded. As for bayer color filter array support, I don't think we should use names like GBR411. Each component has an absolute position, there are several possible layouts, and sometimes the 2 green components are treated separately. Two possibilities come to mind. 1) Have something generic like PIX_FMT_GBR_CFA3/CFA4 (with pixel depth variants) and describe the various layouts separately from the normal pixel descriptor. I believe there is even an obscure YUV CFA format. 2) Have many different CFA-type pixel formats for the various configurations and use a PIX_FMT_CFA flag to indicate that the components are actually individual pixels layed out in a color filter array rather than being one color part of a single pixel. -Justin _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
