On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Mike Versteeg <[email protected]> wrote: >>> video PTS, at least for MPEG-2, increments as integer (0, 1, 2, ...) >> >> Oops, my bad... I lost your original requirement to be MPEG-2 >> compliant. But maybe it would be enough to set REPEAT_FIRST_FIELD once >> in a while. > > Thanks. I am not familiar with that. Won't that introduce a double frame?
No, it is sued to fight interlaced video (a.k.a telecine). The effect of this flag is that the frame is slowed down by 50%. It should be good enough to keep a ~30 fps video seamlessly synchronized with the audio stream that is a bit slower. > And if that's a trick that works I assume it can only be used to delay my > video, what if I need to speed it up? That's where you can have problems. > So other formats do support "true" time stamping? Absolutely. MPEG-4 h264 stream has full support of flexible PTS per frame, and it will deliver much better quality. But it really needs more CPU, and you may face questions of licenses, patents, and royalties for use of different h264 encoders. Anyway, if you are looking at player support, MPEG-2 is the king. I hope that other people on this list will have more to share on this topic. Alex _______________________________________________ Libav-user mailing list [email protected] http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-user
