[FFmpeg-user] creating h264 .mp4 MBAFF tff/bff h264 with AAC audio

[Albert Scholtalbers]

>I am not a native speaker but it appears to me this question
>makes no sense. ("Do I have to add apples if I eat oranges?")

What the problem mostly is, that people say use this, but for people who
are not into the development it doesn't make sense to to things like that.
My motto is always keep it simple and people will understand it.
Unfortunately not everybody thinks like that. Also not everybody likes to
write long manuals.

My question was. All source material is Interlaced and needs to be send to
servers which only accept Interlaced. I need an intermediate low bandwidth
transport solution in the form of h264. As every conversion means degrading
the info/picture I like to keep it all Interlaced.
So no detection, just 100% interlaced in, 100% interlaced out. But maybe
this remark sounds silly as you take something into account of which I'm
not aware of.


> But if your command line contains (-)x264opts, it will make
> sense to also add -vcodec libx264. Or why would you use
> -x264opts in the first place?
> (Is that really your question?)
>
> Again, this is very hard to parse.
> But if your question is "If my input video shows combing
> artefacts because it is interlaced, does FFmpeg remove them
> on transcoding without me adding any options to the command
> line?" then the answer is "No". (It is also "No" if your
> question is "My input video is interlaced, I am interested
> in re-encoding without wasted bandwidth, will FFmpeg
> automatically detect interlaced content and activate
> appropriate encoding options?" Please see a recent thread
> containing a discussion that it is not possible to auto-
> detect interlaced material without an explicit and time-consuming
> effort, the idet filter).
>

Interesting, and what if part of the content is progressive, and lot
interlaced...From what I understood of MBAFF, one of the two ways to create
Interlace video with h264 it seems to check itself if two fields are part
of an interlace frame or an progressive frame, so why bother. Or am I wrong
on this issue?



> Please consider that what you call "clean up" would be
> called "useless breaking of long-time options" by most /
> all existing users.
>
I understand


> (Generally, always add the complete, uncut console output, not
> an excerpt.)
> Please read http://ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg.html#libx264 again, the syntax
> to pass x264 options via -x264options is slightly different than you
> seem to believe.
>

Ok I understand