[MPlayer-users] filters order: pullup vs postprocessing
D Richard Felker III
dalias at aerifal.cx
Thu Mar 24 01:09:55 CET 2005
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 02:37:54AM +0300, Vladimir Mosgalin wrote:
> Hi D Richard Felker III!
> On 2005.03.23 at 16:39:32 -0500, D Richard Felker III wrote next:
> > > If I want to use both postprocessing (say, spp) and pullup filter when
> > > encoding from dvd, in what order should they go? Will -vf spp,pullup
> > > order be OK in case of completely soft-telecined material? What about
> > if the material is completely soft-telecined, you should not be using
> > pullup, since it will just waste time, and either do nothing or
> > introduce errors!
> Er.. Yes, my mistake - of course I meant hard telecine.
> > if the material is hard-telecined whatsoever, you CANNOT apply
> > postprocessing to it directly or you will ruin the separation between
> > the fields by blurring them together. so always use -vf pullup,spp,...
> > > detc and filmdint filters instead of pullup?
> > detc most definitely does not pass the quantization info through, so
> > postproc filters will not work correctly after it. filmdint might; i
> > don't know. ivtc does not. pullup does.
> Thanks, just what I needed to know.
> However, pullup seems to perform much worse than detc and filmdint on
> this material, it prints a lot of "skip frame" messages - there are
> low-motion sequences up to 15 seconds where it can't drop anything at
> all. Is there some solution to get both postprocessing and nicer ivtc
> process than with pullup?
Explain better what's happening. It sounds like you have a long still
sequence during which ALL the fields are from the same source frame,
in which case it doesn't make any difference which ones you drop.
More information about the MPlayer-users