ffmpeg developer: "Using <extremely common use case> is invalid to prove anything." Why do I even waste my time on this?https://twitter.com/BMahol/status/1255867904475750401 …
Show this thread
-
Yes, this is how codec tests are done, but 1) I'm not going to recruit a team of volunteer testers just to prove this to the ffmpeg devs, and 2) it only works to determine transparency thresholds. Comparisons between encoders at non-transparent bitrates are always subjective.
The latter is important because *how audible/annoying/disagreeable* your artifacts are is a huge part of being a good psychoacoustic encoder. Opus is notoriously good here, for example.
-
-
Any those are just a few thoughts. Having spent a lot of time with the libav* APIs, I’m not sure I want to wrestle with that code any more than I have to, let alone go to the mat with the minds that conceived it.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.