在 2015/1/22 12:29, Philip Langdale 写道:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 12:15:44 +0800
Agatha Hu a...@nvidia.com wrote:
We will fix the issue in driver, overscan compensation will be
applied to input DAR *only* if the DAR is 4:3 or 16:9, otherwise
won't unnecessarily modify the aspect ratio for resolutions
On 2015/1/21 16:00, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
On 21.01.2015, at 07:17, Agatha Hu a...@nvidia.com wrote:
On 2015/1/18 4:01, Philip Langdale wrote:
Here's the reply from NVENC engineers
It is not same thing as SAR. It is the display aspect ratio i.e width/height =
DAR/SAR
The calculation
On 22.01.2015, at 05:15, Agatha Hu a...@nvidia.com wrote:
On 2015/1/21 16:00, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
On 21.01.2015, at 07:17, Agatha Hu a...@nvidia.com wrote:
On 2015/1/18 4:01, Philip Langdale wrote:
Here's the reply from NVENC engineers
It is not same thing as SAR. It is the display
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 12:15:44 +0800
Agatha Hu a...@nvidia.com wrote:
We will fix the issue in driver, overscan compensation will be
applied to input DAR *only* if the DAR is 4:3 or 16:9, otherwise
won't unnecessarily modify the aspect ratio for resolutions like
720x480 and 720x576.
The fix
On 21.01.2015, at 07:17, Agatha Hu a...@nvidia.com wrote:
On 2015/1/18 4:01, Philip Langdale wrote:
There is a long sad story behind all this, but it's somewhat ambiguous as to
whether DVD content should be treated as 720 pixels wide or 704 pixels, with
16 pixels cut off. If you decide is
Le nonidi 29 nivôse, an CCXXIII, compn a écrit :
[08:57] kierank compn: the nvidia behaviour is correct
It would help a lot if he had the courtesy of actually explaining why he
considers the behaviour to be correct. After all, a lot of people in this
thread, possibly not as smart and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 17/01/15 23:52, Nicolas George wrote:
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
There is a very simple way of flagging content that is supposed to comply
with BT601: the SAR is 512/351. If SAR is 64/45, that means someone before
On 19.01.2015, at 01:16, compn te...@mi.rr.com wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jan 2015 18:41:09 +0100
Reimar Döffinger reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de wrote:
Oh my god, this is so horribly broken I vote for doing a return
-EBROKENAPI and tell them we'll enable this when NVidia fixes their
stuff.
IMHO some
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 02:52:59AM +0100, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
Oops I misunderstood, you mean the software must comply with the users
wishes.
Yes.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 11:16:04AM +, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
On 18 January 2015 at 09:40, Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
Le nonidi 29 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Hendrik Leppkes a écrit :
nvenc should behave the same as libx264, or any other video encoder, if
this patch makes it do that,
On Sun, 18 Jan 2015 10:40:24 +0100
Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
I have downloaded BT.601 from URL:
http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BT.601/ , both the most recent and the
oldest versions, and I did not find any explicit reference of this
702 business, nor could I decipher indirect
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 01:28:36PM +, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
On 18 January 2015 at 12:22, Michael Niedermayer michae...@gmx.at wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 02:52:59AM +0100, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
L'octidi 28
On 18 January 2015 at 09:40, Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
Le nonidi 29 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Hendrik Leppkes a écrit :
nvenc should behave the same as libx264, or any other video encoder, if
this patch makes it do that, then it should be applied.
If bt601 needs special handling not yet
On 18 January 2015 at 12:22, Michael Niedermayer michae...@gmx.at wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 02:52:59AM +0100, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
Oops I misunderstood, you
Le nonidi 29 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Hendrik Leppkes a écrit :
nvenc should behave the same as libx264, or any other video encoder, if
this patch makes it do that, then it should be applied.
If bt601 needs special handling not yet present in avcodec, it should be
implemented in such a way that
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 11:35:41AM -0800, Philip Langdale wrote:
There is a long sad story behind all this, but it's somewhat ambiguous as to
whether DVD content should be treated as 720 pixels wide or 704 pixels, with
16 pixels cut off. If you decide is should be 704 pixels wide, you need to
On Sun, 18 Jan 2015 18:41:09 +0100
Reimar Döffinger reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de wrote:
Oh my god, this is so horribly broken I vote for doing a return
-EBROKENAPI and tell them we'll enable this when NVidia fixes their
stuff.
IMHO some features are not worth the hacks necessary.
[08:51] compn
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Philip Langdale a écrit :
There is a long sad story behind all this, but it's somewhat ambiguous as to
whether DVD content should be treated as 720 pixels wide or 704 pixels, with
16 pixels cut off. If you decide is should be 704 pixels wide, you need to
adjust
On 17 January 2015 at 23:00, Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
I don't make the standards and frankly whether you dislike them is
your problem but they exist and need to work correctly.
Instead you wish to break things based off an
On 17 January 2015 at 20:01, Philip Langdale phil...@overt.org wrote:
There is a long sad story behind all this, but it's somewhat ambiguous as to
whether DVD content should be treated as 720 pixels wide or 704 pixels, with
16 pixels cut off. If you decide is should be 704 pixels wide, you need
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
BT601 makes this very clear. The active picture is 702 pixels.
There are two fundamental flaws with your reasoning:
First, BT601 only applies to a some kind of videos. Wikipedia tells me it
applies to encoding interlaced analog video
On 17 January 2015 at 23:38, Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
The behaviour of the Nvidia code I believe is correct.
As far as I understand it corrects SAR for 720-width content to comply
with BT601.
That is just not true.
Basic
On 17 January 2015 at 20:42, Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
BT601 makes this very clear. The active picture is 702 pixels.
There are two fundamental flaws with your reasoning:
First, BT601 only applies to a some kind of videos.
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
I don't make the standards and frankly whether you dislike them is
your problem but they exist and need to work correctly.
Instead you wish to break things based off an artificial test pattern
and your own beliefs.
I do not wish to break
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
The behaviour of the Nvidia code I believe is correct.
As far as I understand it corrects SAR for 720-width content to comply
with BT601.
That is just not true.
Basic principle: THE COMPETENT USER IS RIGHT.
If someone knows BT601, and
On 17 January 2015 at 23:46, Kieran Kunhya kier...@obe.tv wrote:
On 17 January 2015 at 23:38, Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
The behaviour of the Nvidia code I believe is correct.
As far as I understand it corrects SAR for
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
There is a very simple way of flagging content that is supposed to comply
with BT601: the SAR is 512/351. If SAR is 64/45, that means someone before
nvenc decided that the video is not expected to conform with BT601, and
nvenc has no
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
Oops I misunderstood, you mean the software must comply with the users wishes.
Yes.
Anyway my argument is that BT601 should be the default for the these
resolutions.
If you want, but that must happen immediately when the contents enters
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Nicolas George geo...@nsup.org wrote:
L'octidi 28 nivôse, an CCXXIII, Kieran Kunhya a écrit :
Oops I misunderstood, you mean the software must comply with the users
wishes.
Yes.
Anyway my argument is that BT601 should be the default for the these
29 matches
Mail list logo
