On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:55:26 +0100 Michael Niedermayer <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 03:23:53PM +0100, Niklas Haas wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:55:56 +0100 Michael Niedermayer > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > is it neccessary to drop compatibility to the old syntax ? > > > > Only if we want to use framesync. If we don't care about synchronizing > > the streams, then we could drop FS and just use a custom activate > > function which forwards output status only to the *corresponding* input. > > if the full bugfix cant be done in the same filter then i guess we need a 2nd > filter, maybe scale1ref
I think we can do this by extending vf_scale itself to support taking a second input, that way we don't need a second filter at all. My proposal for this: - Add new variables ref_w, ref_h (and related fields), possibly aliased to 'rw' and 'rh'. - When `ref_*` is referenced in any expression, vf_scale will init() with a second input stream. - Semantics will be equivalent to this patch. - Fully deprecate scale2ref, and eventually remove it and the main_* series of variables. That way, scale2ref just becomes `scale=w=rw:h=rh`, and also allows us to simplify these filters a bit. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list [email protected] https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email [email protected] with subject "unsubscribe".
