[FFmpeg-devel] evaluating the experimental status of ffv1 version 3
michaelni at gmx.at
Mon Sep 24 14:12:56 CEST 2012
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 01:40:50PM +0200, Peter B. wrote:
> Quoting Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at>:
> >seriously, your tests are very usefull (just here you found a quite
> >serious bug that luckily we can now fix before 1.3 is released)
> >but at this rate i think this is actually slowing ffv1.3
> >work down as i could have done the whole test that i need in a
> >few hours and i still wait for the results from you
> >also you test much more than i asked for [...]
> Currently it's running the parameters in almost all reasonable
> combinations to each other - and of course, that produces *a lot* of
> variations - which takes a lot of time.
> However, if I hadn't ran the testsuite with those many variations,
> the slice-issue might have gone unnoticed.
> Which parts of my testsuite should I remove?
for a whole regression test suite the whole test can make sense
for awnsering specific questions like "can we just switch to gop=1"
specific tests of gop=1 vs gop=300 with a varity of other parameters
are whats needed.
Another test that could be run is testing several short individual
files individually encoded with 2pass mode vs them concatenated and
encoded with 2pass mode
how much worse is it if they are concatenated. This would tell me
if 2 pass mode needs to be worked on or how much could be gained from
> I've narrowed the GOP tests down to "1" vs "300", which should
> greatly cut down the time needed until all files are through.
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Avoid a single point of failure, be that a person or equipment.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel