Dear Paul,
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:26 PM Paul B Mahol wrote:
> > I found a way of doing this differently, as I now found that tmix
> > doesn't actually step frames, unlike skipblend. For history's sake,
> > the way to get skipblend behaviour is to do something like
> > "tmix=frames=100,framestep
On 11/1/18, Matthias Troffaes wrote:
> Dear Paul,
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 11:21 AM Matthias Troffaes
> wrote:
>> Would you consider accepting a patch that added an integer "cutoff"
>> option to tmix, for the purpose of setting all weights for frames
>> beyond "cutoff" to 0? The reason for requ
Dear Paul,
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 11:21 AM Matthias Troffaes
wrote:
> Would you consider accepting a patch that added an integer "cutoff"
> option to tmix, for the purpose of setting all weights for frames
> beyond "cutoff" to 0? The reason for requesting this is that in some
> workflows, one is
Dear Paul,
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:34 AM Paul B Mahol wrote:
> Duplicates funcionality of tmix filter.
Many thanks for your reply, and for pointing out the existence of the
tmix filter. Please forgive my ignorance about it. I see tmix was only
added in April this year, whilst I've been carryin
On 11/1/18, Matthias Troffaes wrote:
> Dear FFmpeg developers,
>
> ... is there a possibility for this patch to get applied? Obviously
> I'm happy to work further on the code where need be to get this
> upstreamed.
Duplicates funcionality of tmix filter.
__
Dear FFmpeg developers,
... is there a possibility for this patch to get applied? Obviously
I'm happy to work further on the code where need be to get this
upstreamed.
Kind regards,
Matthias
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:14 AM Matthias Troffaes
wrote:
>
> Attached a patch which adds a "skipblend" f
Attached a patch which adds a "skipblend" filter, which I've been
using for a while. My hope is that an ffmpeg developer here can merge
it. The filter is similar to the framestep filter, but additionally
blends frames together at each step, for a motion blur effect. The
number of frames that are bl
... any chance for this patch to get applied? Quick link to original thread:
https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2017-June/211866.html
Rebased version of patch against latest master attached.
Kind regards,
Matthias
diff --git a/Changelog b/Changelog
index 187ae79..4fa0870 100644
--- a/Chan
On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 10:09:04 +0100, Matthias Troffaes wrote:
> > This maximum value is no longer correct.
> It's correct as far as I can tell. From the code:
Sorry, you're right and I'm wrong. I missed the change to int64.
> > Just wondering: Isn't this also useful for a slideshow-like
> > tr
Dear Moritz,
On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> I can't comment on the rest (and still really like the concept), but
> just this:
>
>> +Allowed values are positive integers between @code{1} and @code{65535}.
>
> This maximum value is no longer correct.
It's correct as far a
I can't comment on the rest (and still really like the concept), but
just this:
> +Allowed values are positive integers between @code{1} and @code{65535}.
This maximum value is no longer correct.
> +Allowed values are positive integers between @code{1} and @code{step},
> +where @code{1} correspo
---
Changelog | 1 +
doc/filters.texi | 30
libavfilter/Makefile | 1 +
libavfilter/allfilters.c | 1 +
libavfilter/version.h | 2 +-
libavfilter/vf_skipblend.c | 272 +
Attached a patch which adds a "skipblend" filter, which is similar to
the framestep filter, but additionally blends frames together at each
step, for a motion blur effect. The number of frames that are blended
(i.e. the exposure time, in frames) can be set, allowing control over
the strength of the
13 matches
Mail list logo
