Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FFmpeg 1.1 Brings New Support, Encoders/Decoders

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Still no H.264 MVC (multiview video coding) support. Is anybody working on this at all?

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by arokh View Post
      Still no H.264 MVC (multiview video coding) support. Is anybody working on this at all?
      Well I think it was part of ESA:s summer of code 2012, which had deadline 28.10.2012:
      http://wiki.multimedia.cx/index.php?...2012#H.264_MVC
      http://wiki.multimedia.cx/index.php?..._In_Space_2012

      But I don't know did they find anyone to code it.

      Edit: I think it failed, but it have started(kind of):
      [00:35] <canbal> hi, does anyone know if there are any plans or working progress on supporting H.264/MVC decoding in ffmpeg?
      [00:36] <michaelni> why do you ask ?
      [00:37] <michaelni> do you want to work on that ?
      [00:46] <canbal> i work on H.264/MVC and Video+Depth compression in my research
      [00:46] <canbal> and I rely on ffmpeg constantly to do frame extraction etc
      [00:47] <canbal> i recently encountered a consumer level camera that encodes MVC and i tried to extract frames from it
      [00:47] <canbal> ffmpeg obviously doesn't support it, so i was wondering if i could be any help for the implementation
      [00:47] <canbal> i don't have the time to take the lead, but i would like to contribute if there is any working progress or any intentions
      [00:49] <gnafu> Ooh, which camera?
      [00:52] <canbal> http://amzn.to/IqAGL7
      [00:52] <canbal> sony td20 3d camera
      [00:53] <gnafu> Cool, thanks.
      [00:53] <canbal> np, so any ideas if anyone is working on this and looking for some help?
      [00:53] <michaelni> canbal, there definitly is interrest in a MVC implementation and i had considered to work on it myself
      [00:53] <michaelni> but iam too busy
      [00:54] <michaelni> with other open source things ...
      [00:56] <canbal> i see
      [00:56] <canbal> i am quite busy too - working part time and doing a phd at the same time
      [00:56] <canbal> that's why i can't dare to start on my own
      [01:08] <Compn> canbal : ask on the list
      [01:08] <Compn> i think there are some interested parties who may want to join up
      [01:09] <canbal> ok i will do that
      [01:09] <canbal> thank you for the info
      [01:09] <Compn> at least michael said he would mentor , in our failed bid for summer of code project
      [01:10] <Compn> so there will be help, if you want to start
      [01:10] <Compn> i think a good place to start is just to start a discussion on how to work the api
      [01:10] <Compn> e.g. how to demux it and pass to decoder
      [01:12] <Compn> seems like a difficult thing to do
      [01:12] <Compn> well maybe not
      [01:12] <Compn> wonder how optimizing would go , can motion vectors be reused? :P
      [01:31] <canbal> for decode process, the MVC stream macroblocks have their own motion vectors
      Last edited by tuke81; 01-09-2013, 10:31 AM.

      Comment


      • #23
        It's all wrong that article

        Except that most of that article is just plain wrong.

        FFmpeg 1.1 is a bug fix release of the release/1.0 branch.

        There's nothing new since ffmpeg 1.0 ; just bug fixes.

        Most of the changes listed are only in the current FFmpeg master.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by jyavenard View Post
          Except that most of that article is just plain wrong.

          FFmpeg 1.1 is a bug fix release of the release/1.0 branch.

          There's nothing new since ffmpeg 1.0 ; just bug fixes.

          Most of the changes listed are only in the current FFmpeg master.
          No, you are wrong. Bug fix releases for the 1.0 branch are released as 1.0.x.

          1.1 is a feature release. Try actually reading the ChangeLog.

          Comment

          Working...
          X