Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

2018-01-10 11:57 GMT+01:00 Vasile Toncu : > From the messages regarding the new reinterlace filter, based on your > arguments and guidance, I came out with the following solution. > > Modify tinterlace filter so that it would behave like that: > >/if GONGIG_GPL is

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

On 1/10/18, Vasile Toncu wrote: > Hello, > > From the messages regarding the new reinterlace filter, based on your > arguments and guidance, I came out with the following solution. > > Modify tinterlace filter so that it would behave like that: > > /if GONGIG_GPL is

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Hello, From the messages regarding the new reinterlace filter, based on your arguments and guidance, I came out with the following solution. Modify tinterlace filter so that it would behave like that: /if GONGIG_GPL is defined:/ /    use curent titnerlace code with asm opts/

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

2018-01-03 16:08 GMT+01:00 Vasile Toncu : > Can it be submitted on a new branch, different than master? You can create such a branch in your own github account. > In the future I may replace the tinterlace to be LGPL, until > then can reinterlace exist on a separate

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Thank you for your guidance. I understand your points. I was thinking about a simple solution: Can it be submitted on a new branch, different than master? In the future I may replace the tinterlace to be LGPL, until then can reinterlace exist on a separate branch in git? On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

2017-12-28 16:12 GMT+01:00 Vasile Toncu : > Is there anything that I can do to the current version of reinterlace > so that the filter can be accepted? Wasn't this already explained? Add the existing (GPL'd) asm optimizations to your new filter (and make sure the filter

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Vasile Toncu (2017-12-28): > Is submision to an older version > possible? No. Branches are only maintained for bugs. New development only happens on Git head. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 at 17:14, Nicolas George wrote: > Vasile Toncu (2017-12-28): > > Is there anything that I can do to the current version of reinterlace so > > that the filter can be accepted? > > For me, yes: make it fully compatible with tinterlace and call it that. > The

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Vasile Toncu (2017-12-28): > Is there anything that I can do to the current version of reinterlace so > that the filter can be accepted? For me, yes: make it fully compatible with tinterlace and call it that. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 at 15:41, Nicolas George wrote: > Vasile Toncu (2017-12-28): > > There are some features that tinterlace has and reinterlace does not. > > > > Tinterlace has some more flags, reinterlace has only simple low pass > filter. > > Also, in a newer version,

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

On 28.12.2017 15:17, Nicolas George wrote: Vasile Toncu (2017-12-28): Are there any features that tinterlace has and this new filter has not? If not, then I think it would be better to just replace tinterlace entirely. You did not answer the question. I asked if there are features in

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Vasile Toncu (2017-12-28): > There are some features that tinterlace has and reinterlace does not. > > Tinterlace has some more flags, reinterlace has only simple low pass filter. > Also, in a newer version, tinterlace does support input formats on 16 bit. > > Expecting these two, there are no

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Vasile Toncu (2017-12-28): > >Are there any features that tinterlace has and this new filter has not? > >If not, then I think it would be better to just replace tinterlace > >entirely. > The main difference between those those two filters is that reinterlace > processes > planes of output frames

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

On 27.12.2017 15:31, Nicolas George wrote: Vasile Toncu (2017-12-27): It is because of licencing issues. I wanted the new filter to be LGPL. Thanks for the explanation. That is a valid reason. But as is, it would result would be duplicated code for people who do not worry about licensing.

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Vasile Toncu (2017-12-27): > It is because of licencing issues. I wanted the new filter to be LGPL. Thanks for the explanation. That is a valid reason. But as is, it would result would be duplicated code for people who do not worry about licensing. Are there any features that tinterlace has and

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

> > The reinterlace filter does various interlace/interleave/merge operations > > between consecutive frames of a video. It tries too behave just like > > tinterlace filter, including some new modes. Why not add the new modes to the tinterlace filter, then? > It is because of licencing issues. I

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Vasile Toncu (2017-12-27): > The reinterlace filter does various interlace/interleave/merge operations > between consecutive frames of a video. It tries too behave just like > tinterlace filter, including some new modes. Why not add the new modes to the tinterlace filter, then? > On Wed, Dec 27,

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Hello, The reinterlace filter does various interlace/interleave/merge operations between consecutive frames of a video. It tries too behave just like tinterlace filter, including some new modes. On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote: > Hi, > > On 12/27/17,

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Thanks for the patch. Initial comments below. Vasile Toncu (2017-12-27): > --- > doc/filters.texi | 87 ++- > libavfilter/Makefile | 2 + > libavfilter/allfilters.c | 2 + > libavfilter/reinterlace.h| 130 ++ > libavfilter/vf_reinterlace.c | 597 >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

Hi, On 12/27/17, Vasile Toncu wrote: > --- > doc/filters.texi | 87 ++- > libavfilter/Makefile | 2 + > libavfilter/allfilters.c | 2 + > libavfilter/reinterlace.h| 130 ++ > libavfilter/vf_reinterlace.c | 597 >

[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] added reitnerlace filter

--- doc/filters.texi | 87 ++- libavfilter/Makefile | 2 + libavfilter/allfilters.c | 2 + libavfilter/reinterlace.h| 130 ++ libavfilter/vf_reinterlace.c | 597 +++ 5 files changed, 812 insertions(+), 6