>> On 19 Dec 2023, at 17:16, Erik Dobberkau <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Trust me, this command (besides audio parsing, depending on sources) >>> has made thousands of broadcast compliant files over here, where >>> XDCAM is also mandatory. >>> >> >> Does that mean the issue mentioned here: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg26313.html >> <https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg26313.html> (and its >> follow-up messages) is not an issue anymore? > >No clue, only thing I know is that the stupid broadcasters over here accept >files created as I showed Bouke _______________________________________________
Each broadcaster has its own requirements. They can be very vague or very specific. They can be justified, "fair" or they can be fictional. They can be thoroughly checked by a QC system upstream, or only lately by simply checking if Image and Sound pops up. There is definetely no universal "standard expectation". Only thing is, when using native sony hardware, the file will be played out - or not, but this is a very rare use case. Nowadays, most of the times, broadcasters ask for sony XDCAMHD but only require MPEG2-50 for real. But even so, you can face a "Baton dans les roues" (sorry for the poor French joke) : the enforced checks are often not related to the real world needs. MXF interop should not be a big deal, but the xdcamhd essence can be, depending on your broadcaster expectations. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list [email protected] https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email [email protected] with subject "unsubscribe".
