>
> > >Most notably content that has progressive video but stored interlaced.
> > "encoded" rather than "stored", but yes, it is indeed very commonplace.
> > Nevertheless, be very very carefull, it is also very very commonplace to
> > have interlaced branding/finishing on progressive content, so
>
> >As the title says, is this at all possible? My concern is mostly with
> mpeg2 and h264 that have content of one type but encoded/marked as another.
> In a general manner, amongst other things, interlaced encoding involves
> interlaced DCT, so this is not possible because it is not a simple
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 10:56 AM Nicolas Gaullier
wrote:
> >As the title says, is this at all possible? My concern is mostly with
> mpeg2 and h264 that have content of one type but encoded/marked as another.
> In a general manner, amongst other things, interlaced encoding involves
> interlaced
>As the title says, is this at all possible? My concern is mostly with mpeg2
>and h264 that have content of one type but encoded/marked as another.
In a general manner, amongst other things, interlaced encoding involves
interlaced DCT, so this is not possible because it is not a simple "mark".
It’s no problem at all.
Btw, it’s very common to store progressive as interlaced, as broadcast still
requires interlaced material, no matter how it is shot.
From memory, just do a -c copy and you’ll end up with the source in a
progressive container.
Bouke
> On 05 Dec 2022, at 11:56, Steinar
Hi,
As the title says, is this at all possible? My concern is mostly with mpeg2
and h264 that have content of one type but encoded/marked as another. Most
notably content that has progressive video but stored interlaced. So I'm
probably talking about a bit stream filter here because just setting
