On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 15:51:53 +0200 Anton Shekhovtsov <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2015-01-28 15:34 GMT+02:00 Nicolas George <[email protected]>: > > > Le nonidi 9 pluviôse, an CCXXIII, Max Vlasov a écrit : > > > The idea was to read all packets saving pts and keyframe flag (without > > > decoding) and make a list of them in order of ptses. After this we have a > > > ready FrameCount and when one needs to jump to an exact frame number > > > > Why do people here always want to work with frame numbers? Frame numbers > > are > > unreliable, they are a remnant of the time where containers could only do > > constant FPS. > > > > The correct way of identifying a frame is not its number, it is its > > timestamp. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- > > Nicolas George > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Libav-user mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-user > > > > > Frames are important entities if the application is video editor. > It wants to treat video as a sequence of images. It wants discrete timeline > where each frame is a unit. > How about buffering 40ms of video in memory? Vague. 40 frames? Required > memory=frame_size*40. Simple. etc Things like FFMS2 use a complete index and a cache for this. L-SMASH-Works (which is a different project from L-SMASH) does something similar and is more modern, AFAIK. _______________________________________________ Libav-user mailing list [email protected] http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-user
