ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
33 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak
For soft telecined videos, all frames have
'progressive_frame' = 1
(source: T-REC-H.262-201202-I, confirmed via VOBEdit).
However, the frames that ffprobe marks 'repeat_pict' = 0 have
'interlaced_frame' = 1.

Assumptions:
1, ffprobe's 'interlaced_frame' is the inverse of MPEG2's
'progressive_frame', and
2, ffprobe's 'repeat_pict' is identical to MPEG2's 'repeat_first_field', and
3, ffprobe's quirks are also ffmpeg's quirks, so this problem applies
also to ffmpeg.

If my assumptions are incorrect,
1, What is the correct meaning of ffmpeg's 'interlaced_frame'?
2, What is the correct meaning of ffmpeg's 'repeat_pict'?

Question: Why doesn't ffmpeg use the same metadata names & meanings that
are found in the H.262 specification?

Question: Is there a way to get ffprobe to output the actual metadata?

Windows command used:
ffprobe -i %1 -select_streams v:0 -show_frames -of flat -sexagesimal |
FINDSTR /L "key_frame=1 top_field_first repeat_pict interlaced_frame"

Thanks for the help,
Mark.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 20:51 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
<[hidden email]>:
>
> For soft telecined videos, all frames have
> 'progressive_frame' = 1

I may miss something but since FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine
why should there be an interlaced frame?

In general, please provide command line including complete, uncut
console output when asking questions here.

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak
Thank you, Carl. I'm repeating my submittal in order to keep this thread
intact. My responses are interposed at the bottom...

For soft telecined videos, all frames have
'progressive_frame' = 1
(source: T-REC-H.262-201202-I, confirmed via VOBEdit).
However, the frames that ffprobe marks 'repeat_pict' = 0 have
'interlaced_frame' = 1.

Assumptions:
1, ffprobe's 'interlaced_frame' is the inverse of MPEG2's
'progressive_frame', and
2, ffprobe's 'repeat_pict' is identical to MPEG2's 'repeat_first_field', and
3, ffprobe's quirks are also ffmpeg's quirks, so this problem applies
also to ffmpeg.

If my assumptions are incorrect,
1, What is the correct meaning of ffmpeg's 'interlaced_frame'?
2, What is the correct meaning of ffmpeg's 'repeat_pict'?

Question: Why doesn't ffmpeg use the same metadata names & meanings that
are found in the H.262 specification?

Question: Is there a way to get ffprobe to output the actual metadata?

Windows command used:
ffprobe -i %1 -select_streams v:0 -show_frames -of flat -sexagesimal |
FINDSTR /L "key_frame=1 top_field_first repeat_pict interlaced_frame"

Thanks for the help,
Mark.


On 01/26/2020 03:03 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 20:51 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> For soft telecined videos, all frames have
>> 'progressive_frame' = 1
>
> I may miss something but since FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine
> why should there be an interlaced frame?

Yes, ffmpeg does not make soft telecined streams. However, the soft
telecined videos are inputs, not outputs.

> In general, please provide command line including complete, uncut
> console output when asking questions here.

I provided the command line:
ffprobe -i %1 -select_streams v:0 -show_frames -of flat -sexagesimal |
FINDSTR /L "key_frame=1 top_field_first repeat_pict interlaced_frame"

The console output is very, very long because it outputs all frames.
However, I assume you want to see the versions I'm using. Here they are:

ffprobe version N-94664-g0821bc4eee Copyright (c) 2007-2019 the FFmpeg
developers
   built with gcc 9.1.1 (GCC) 20190807
   configuration: --enable-gpl --enable-version3 --enable-sdl2
--enable-fontconfig --enable-gnutls --enable-iconv --enable-libass
--enable-libdav1d --enable-libbluray --enable-libfreetype
--enable-libmp3lame --enable-libopencore-amrnb
--enable-libopencore-amrwb --enable-libopenjpeg --enable-libopus
--enable-libshine --enable-libsnappy --enable-libsoxr --enable-libtheora
--enable-libtwolame --enable-libvpx --enable-libwavpack --enable-libwebp
--enable-libx264 --enable-libx265 --enable-libxml2 --enable-libzimg
--enable-lzma --enable-zlib --enable-gmp --enable-libvidstab
--enable-libvorbis --enable-libvo-amrwbenc --enable-libmysofa
--enable-libspeex --enable-libxvid --enable-libaom --enable-libmfx
--enable-amf --enable-ffnvcodec --enable-cuvid --enable-d3d11va
--enable-nvenc --enable-nvdec --enable-dxva2 --enable-avisynth
--enable-libopenmpt
   libavutil      56. 33.100 / 56. 33.100
   libavcodec     58. 55.101 / 58. 55.101
   libavformat    58. 31.104 / 58. 31.104
   libavdevice    58.  9.100 / 58.  9.100
   libavfilter     7. 58.101 /  7. 58.101
   libswscale      5.  6.100 /  5.  6.100
   libswresample   3.  6.100 /  3.  6.100
   libpostproc    55.  6.100 / 55.  6.100

Thank you for your assistance -- Mark.
> Carl Eugen

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 21:19 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
<[hidden email]>:

> On 01/26/2020 03:03 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 20:51 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> > <[hidden email]>:
> >>
> >> For soft telecined videos, all frames have
> >> 'progressive_frame' = 1
> >
> > I may miss something but since FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine
> > why should there be an interlaced frame?
>
> Yes, ffmpeg does not make soft telecined streams. However, the soft
> telecined videos are inputs, not outputs.

I don't think FFmpeg "supports" soft-telecined input streams.
At least not in the way once opon a time defined in an ancient NTSC
standard...

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 21:50 Uhr schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos
<[hidden email]>:

>
> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 21:19 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> <[hidden email]>:
>
> > On 01/26/2020 03:03 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > > Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 20:51 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> > > <[hidden email]>:
> > >>
> > >> For soft telecined videos, all frames have
> > >> 'progressive_frame' = 1
> > >
> > > I may miss something but since FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine
> > > why should there be an interlaced frame?
> >
> > Yes, ffmpeg does not make soft telecined streams. However, the soft
> > telecined videos are inputs, not outputs.
>
> I don't think FFmpeg "supports" soft-telecined input streams.
> At least not in the way once opon a time defined in an ancient NTSC
> standard...

PS:
We would of course see this had you provided the (necessary)
console output.

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak
In reply to this post by Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
On 01/26/2020 03:50 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:

> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 21:19 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> <[hidden email]>:
>
>> On 01/26/2020 03:03 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>>> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 20:51 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>>
>>>> For soft telecined videos, all frames have
>>>> 'progressive_frame' = 1
>>>
>>> I may miss something but since FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine
>>> why should there be an interlaced frame?
>>
>> Yes, ffmpeg does not make soft telecined streams. However, the soft
>> telecined videos are inputs, not outputs.
>
> I don't think FFmpeg "supports" soft-telecined input streams.
> At least not in the way once opon a time defined in an ancient NTSC
> standard...

You are confusing soft telecine with hard telecine. Since autumn 1999,
nearly 100% of all region 1 DVDs are soft telecined, so, of course,
ffmpeg supports soft-telecined inputs.

> Carl Eugen

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 22:00 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
<[hidden email]>:

>
> On 01/26/2020 03:50 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 21:19 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> > <[hidden email]>:
> >
> >> On 01/26/2020 03:03 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> >>> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 20:51 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> >>> <[hidden email]>:
> >>>>
> >>>> For soft telecined videos, all frames have
> >>>> 'progressive_frame' = 1
> >>>
> >>> I may miss something but since FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine
> >>> why should there be an interlaced frame?
> >>
> >> Yes, ffmpeg does not make soft telecined streams. However, the soft
> >> telecined videos are inputs, not outputs.
> >
> > I don't think FFmpeg "supports" soft-telecined input streams.
> > At least not in the way once opon a time defined in an ancient NTSC
> > standard...
>
> You are confusing soft telecine with hard telecine.

I thought you are...
(hard-telecine encoding and decoding is - of course - supported
by FFmpeg)

> Since autumn 1999, nearly 100% of all region 1 DVDs are
> soft telecined

And such dvds are progressive if you don't watch on an
(American) crt tv ...

> so, of course, ffmpeg supports soft-telecined inputs.

... which you cannot use with FFmpeg - FFmpeg
therefore will ignore soft-telecine (not "support" it).

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak
In reply to this post by Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
On 01/26/2020 03:51 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:

> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 21:50 Uhr schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos
> <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 21:19 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
>> <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>> On 01/26/2020 03:03 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>>>> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 20:51 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
>>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>
>>>>> For soft telecined videos, all frames have
>>>>> 'progressive_frame' = 1
>>>>
>>>> I may miss something but since FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine
>>>> why should there be an interlaced frame?
>>>
>>> Yes, ffmpeg does not make soft telecined streams. However, the soft
>>> telecined videos are inputs, not outputs.
>>
>> I don't think FFmpeg "supports" soft-telecined input streams.
>> At least not in the way once opon a time defined in an ancient NTSC
>> standard...
>
> PS:
> We would of course see this had you provided the (necessary)
> console output.
>
> Carl Eugen

Here you go:

C:\CMD & tiny apps\ffmpeg>ffprobe -i b:\VIDEO_TS\VTS_01_2.VOB
-select_streams v:0 -show_frames -of flat -sexagesimal | FINDSTR /L
"key_frame=1 top_field_first repeat_pict interlaced_frame">foo.txt
ffprobe version N-94664-g0821bc4eee Copyright (c) 2007-2019 the FFmpeg
developers
   built with gcc 9.1.1 (GCC) 20190807
   configuration: --enable-gpl --enable-version3 --enable-sdl2
--enable-fontconfig --enable-gnutls --enable-iconv --enable-libass
--enable-libdav1d --enable-libbluray --enable-libfreetype
--enable-libmp3lame --enable-libopencore-amrnb
--enable-libopencore-amrwb --enable-libopenjpeg --enable-libopus
--enable-libshine --enable-libsnappy --enable-libsoxr --enable-libtheora
--enable-libtwolame --enable-libvpx --enable-libwavpack --enable-libwebp
--enable-libx264 --enable-libx265 --enable-libxml2 --enable-libzimg
--enable-lzma --enable-zlib --enable-gmp --enable-libvidstab
--enable-libvorbis --enable-libvo-amrwbenc --enable-libmysofa
--enable-libspeex --enable-libxvid --enable-libaom --enable-libmfx
--enable-amf --enable-ffnvcodec --enable-cuvid --enable-d3d11va
--enable-nvenc --enable-nvdec --enable-dxva2 --enable-avisynth
--enable-libopenmpt
   libavutil      56. 33.100 / 56. 33.100
   libavcodec     58. 55.101 / 58. 55.101
   libavformat    58. 31.104 / 58. 31.104
   libavdevice    58.  9.100 / 58.  9.100
   libavfilter     7. 58.101 /  7. 58.101
   libswscale      5.  6.100 /  5.  6.100
   libswresample   3.  6.100 /  3.  6.100
   libpostproc    55.  6.100 / 55.  6.100
Input #0, mpeg, from 'b:\VIDEO_TS\VTS_01_2.VOB':
   Duration: 00:23:23.39, start: 1344.312633, bitrate: 6118 kb/s
     Stream #0:0[0x1bf]: Data: dvd_nav_packet
     Stream #0:1[0x1e0]: Video: mpeg2video (Main), yuv420p(tv,
progressive), 720x480 [SAR 8:9 DAR 4:3], 29.97 fps, 59.94 tbr, 90k tbn,
59.94 tbc
     Stream #0:2[0x80]: Audio: ac3, 48000 Hz, mono, fltp, 192 kb/s
     Stream #0:3[0x20]: Subtitle: dvd_subtitle
     Stream #0:4[0x21]: Subtitle: dvd_subtitle
Unsupported codec with id 100357 for input stream 0
frames.frame.0.key_frame=1
frames.frame.0.interlaced_frame=0
frames.frame.0.top_field_first=0
frames.frame.0.repeat_pict=1
frames.frame.1.interlaced_frame=1
frames.frame.1.top_field_first=1
frames.frame.1.repeat_pict=0
frames.frame.2.interlaced_frame=0
frames.frame.2.top_field_first=1
frames.frame.2.repeat_pict=1
frames.frame.3.interlaced_frame=1
frames.frame.3.top_field_first=0
frames.frame.3.repeat_pict=0

The above 3-2 pull-down continues for another 33641 frames (total: 3.7
M-bytes).

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak
In reply to this post by Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
On 01/26/2020 04:04 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:

> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 22:00 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> On 01/26/2020 03:50 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>>> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 21:19 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>> On 01/26/2020 03:03 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>>>>> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 20:51 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
>>>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For soft telecined videos, all frames have
>>>>>> 'progressive_frame' = 1
>>>>>
>>>>> I may miss something but since FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine
>>>>> why should there be an interlaced frame?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, ffmpeg does not make soft telecined streams. However, the soft
>>>> telecined videos are inputs, not outputs.
>>>
>>> I don't think FFmpeg "supports" soft-telecined input streams.
>>> At least not in the way once opon a time defined in an ancient NTSC
>>> standard...
>>
>> You are confusing soft telecine with hard telecine.
>
> I thought you are...
> (hard-telecine encoding and decoding is - of course - supported
> by FFmpeg)

No, it's not. ffmpeg makes only frame pictures, not field pictures. Hard
telecine is an interlaced format and ffmpeg doesn't make interlaced output.

It's really moot. I'm not writing about ffmpeg. I'm writing about ffprobe.

>> Since autumn 1999, nearly 100% of all region 1 DVDs are
>> soft telecined
>
> And such dvds are progressive if you don't watch on an
> (American) crt tv ...

Yes, the DVD VOBs all have the MPEG2 'progressive-frame' metadata bit set.

>> so, of course, ffmpeg supports soft-telecined inputs.
>
> ... which you cannot use with FFmpeg - FFmpeg
> therefore will ignore soft-telecine (not "support" it).

I am analyzing videos using ffprobe. I'm not making videos. That 'said',
of course ffmpeg supports soft telecine. Otherwise, it couldn't
decode/transcode any DVDs mastered since 1999.

> Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 22:21 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
<[hidden email]>:

> ffmpeg makes only frame pictures, not field pictures. Hard telecine
> is an interlaced format and ffmpeg doesn't make interlaced output.

field encoding is not the only way producing interlaced streams...

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak
On 01/26/2020 04:46 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Am So., 26. Jan. 2020 um 22:21 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> <[hidden email]>:
>
>> ffmpeg makes only frame pictures, not field pictures. Hard telecine
>> is an interlaced format and ffmpeg doesn't make interlaced output.
>
> field encoding is not the only way producing interlaced streams...
>
> Carl Eugen

Assumptions:
1, ffprobe's 'interlaced_frame' is the inverse of MPEG2's
'progressive_frame', and
2, ffprobe's 'repeat_pict' is identical to MPEG2's 'repeat_first_field', and
3, ffprobe's quirks are also ffmpeg's quirks, so this problem applies
also to ffmpeg.

If my assumptions are incorrect,
1, What is the correct meaning of ffmpeg's 'interlaced_frame'?
2, What is the correct meaning of ffmpeg's 'repeat_pict'?

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

kumowoon1025
> Assumptions:
> 1, ffprobe's 'interlaced_frame' is the inverse of MPEG2's 'progressive_frame', and
> 2, ffprobe's 'repeat_pict' is identical to MPEG2's 'repeat_first_field', and
> 3, ffprobe's quirks are also ffmpeg's quirks, so this problem applies also to ffmpeg.
>
> If my assumptions are incorrect,
> 1, What is the correct meaning of ffmpeg's 'interlaced_frame'?
> 2, What is the correct meaning of ffmpeg's 'repeat_pict’?

interlaced_frame is the inverse of progressive_frame if progressive_sequence isn’t 1. Otherwise it is 0 for the sequence.

repeat_pict isn’t a flag, it indicates the number of repeats I think, determined by repeat_first_field, top_field_first, progressive_frame and progressive_sequence
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak
On 01/26/2020 05:28 PM, Ted Park wrote:

>> Assumptions:
>> 1, ffprobe's 'interlaced_frame' is the inverse of MPEG2's 'progressive_frame', and
>> 2, ffprobe's 'repeat_pict' is identical to MPEG2's 'repeat_first_field', and
>> 3, ffprobe's quirks are also ffmpeg's quirks, so this problem applies also to ffmpeg.
>>
>> If my assumptions are incorrect,
>> 1, What is the correct meaning of ffmpeg's 'interlaced_frame'?
>> 2, What is the correct meaning of ffmpeg's 'repeat_pict’?
>
> interlaced_frame is the inverse of progressive_frame if progressive_sequence isn’t 1.

That is not correct, Ted. "progressive_sequence isn’t 1" is true for
every DVD I've checked (dozens) except for 1 Korean ripoff (noted
below). When 'progressive_sequence' = '0' and 'progressive_frame' = '1'
and 'repeat_first_field' = '0' (i.e, during a 3-2 pull-down), ffprobe
reports 'interlaced_frame' = '1' and that's not correct.

'interlaced_frame' is wrong for all the soft-telecined cases that I've
checked (dozens), but it's wrong only for frames that have
'repeat_first_field' = '0'. Now, why would that be? The only thing I can
think of is 'interlaced_frame' is buggy.

> Otherwise it is 0 for the sequence.

I've found only one DVD with progressive_sequence = '1', and that turned
out to be a Korean ripoff of "SISTERS" (Brian DePalma), so I can't trust
that it's correct -- the DVD does not play well -- so I can't comment on
that. It does have 'interlaced_frame' = '0' though. But that's not at issue.

> repeat_pict isn’t a flag,

It's metadata, or at least 'repeat_first_field' from the H.262 spec is
metadata. Shall I copy to here the entire DVD-Video/MPEG2 PEG stream
format? I've spent several weeks studying it (during which time I've
found some minor errors in VOBEdit).

> it indicates the number of repeats I think, determined by repeat_first_field, top_field_first, progressive_frame and progressive_sequence

You are referring to this (from the H.262 spec): "If
progressive_sequence is equal to '1', this [top_field_first] flag,
combined with repeat_first_field, indicates how many times (one, two or
three) the reconstructed frame is output by the decoding process.". As I
previously wrote, 'progressive_sequence' is never equal to '1' (expect
for the Korean ripoff) and to my knowledge, this 1/2/3 frame repeat has
never been seen in the wild (nor would it reasonably ever be seen as it
has zero utility).

So, it appears that 'interlaced_frame' as reported by ffprobe is buggy
-- wrong in some of the frames that are part of 3-2 pull-down (i.e.,
soft telecine).

This all matters. It matters a lot. It creates confusion in users and I
can only imagine what it has done to ff libraries (and how they have
been patched to compensate for this bug).
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:21 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
<[hidden email]>:

> This all matters. It matters a lot. It creates confusion in users
> and I can only imagine what it has done to ff libraries (and
> how they have been patched to compensate for this bug).

Do you think the issue you see is also reproducible with
ffmpeg or only with ffprobe?

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak


On 01/26/2020 07:24 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:

> Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:21 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> <[hidden email]>:
>
>> This all matters. It matters a lot. It creates confusion in users
>> and I can only imagine what it has done to ff libraries (and
>> how they have been patched to compensate for this bug).
>
> Do you think the issue you see is also reproducible with
> ffmpeg or only with ffprobe?
>
> Carl Eugen

I have no idea, Carl. I've never used ffmpeg.

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak
In reply to this post by Carl Eugen Hoyos-2


On 01/26/2020 07:24 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:

> Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:21 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> <[hidden email]>:
>
>> This all matters. It matters a lot. It creates confusion in users
>> and I can only imagine what it has done to ff libraries (and
>> how they have been patched to compensate for this bug).
>
> Do you think the issue you see is also reproducible with
> ffmpeg or only with ffprobe?
>
> Carl Eugen

I have no idea, Carl. I've never used ffmpeg.

Actually, that's not true. I've done this:
ffmpeg -ss 30.0 -i %1 -filter:v idet -frames:v 900 -an -f rawvideo -y NUL
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
In reply to this post by Mark Filipak
Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:27 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
<[hidden email]>:

>
>
>
> On 01/26/2020 07:24 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:21 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> > <[hidden email]>:
> >
> >> This all matters. It matters a lot. It creates confusion in users
> >> and I can only imagine what it has done to ff libraries (and
> >> how they have been patched to compensate for this bug).
> >
> > Do you think the issue you see is also reproducible with
> > ffmpeg or only with ffprobe?
>
> I have no idea, Carl. I've never used ffmpeg.

Then why don't you believe that the issue you see is that
FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine when reading
program streams?

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak


On 01/26/2020 07:32 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:

> Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:27 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/26/2020 07:24 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>>> Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:21 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>> This all matters. It matters a lot. It creates confusion in users
>>>> and I can only imagine what it has done to ff libraries (and
>>>> how they have been patched to compensate for this bug).
>>>
>>> Do you think the issue you see is also reproducible with
>>> ffmpeg or only with ffprobe?
>>
>> I have no idea, Carl. I've never used ffmpeg.
>
> Then why don't you believe that the issue you see is that
> FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine when reading
> program streams?
>
> Carl Eugen

Because out of hundreds of region-1 DVDs, I've found only 2 that don't
use soft telecine, at least for the main feature. If ffmpeg didn't
support soft-telecined VOBs as input, then it could not be used to
decode so-called "NTSC" DVDs, HandBrake wouldn't work, MPV wouldn't
work, and LVC wouldn't work.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Mark Filipak
In reply to this post by Carl Eugen Hoyos-2


On 01/26/2020 07:32 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:

> Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:27 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/26/2020 07:24 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>>> Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:21 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>> This all matters. It matters a lot. It creates confusion in users
>>>> and I can only imagine what it has done to ff libraries (and
>>>> how they have been patched to compensate for this bug).
>>>
>>> Do you think the issue you see is also reproducible with
>>> ffmpeg or only with ffprobe?
>>
>> I have no idea, Carl. I've never used ffmpeg.
>
> Then why don't you believe that the issue you see is that
> FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine when reading
> program streams?
>
> Carl Eugen

Because out of hundreds of region-1 DVDs, I've found only 2 that don't
use soft telecine, at least for the main feature. If ffmpeg didn't
support soft-telecined VOBs as input, then it could not be used to
decode so-called "NTSC" DVDs, HandBrake wouldn't work, MPV wouldn't
work, and LVC wouldn't work.

PS: I have only one "PAL" DVD (The Man Who Would Be King), and it uses
2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-3 pull-down.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ffprobe bug in 'interlaced_frame'?

Carl Eugen Hoyos-2
In reply to this post by Mark Filipak
Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:37 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
<[hidden email]>:

>
>
>
> On 01/26/2020 07:32 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:27 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> > <[hidden email]>:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 01/26/2020 07:24 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> >>> Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 01:21 Uhr schrieb Mark Filipak
> >>> <[hidden email]>:
> >>>
> >>>> This all matters. It matters a lot. It creates confusion in users
> >>>> and I can only imagine what it has done to ff libraries (and
> >>>> how they have been patched to compensate for this bug).
> >>>
> >>> Do you think the issue you see is also reproducible with
> >>> ffmpeg or only with ffprobe?
> >>
> >> I have no idea, Carl. I've never used ffmpeg.
> >
> > Then why don't you believe that the issue you see is that
> > FFmpeg does not "support" soft-telecine when reading
> > program streams?
>
> Because out of hundreds of region-1 DVDs, I've found only 2 that don't
> use soft telecine, at least for the main feature. If ffmpeg didn't
> support soft-telecined VOBs as input, then it could not be used to
> decode so-called "NTSC" DVDs,

You misunderstand:
I didn't claim that FFmpeg cannot "read" the decrypted vob files
in soft-telecined dvds, I claimed that the soft-telecine feature in
such vob files is not "supported" (but ignored) because it is
only needed if your display hardware needs it and such
display hardware cannot be used with FFmpeg (or any modern
video player).

It is of course possible that I am wrong, that the flags are not
ignored but incorrectly processed but since they aren't needed
nobody complained so far...

Note that other free vob demuxers and other free mpegvideo
decoders exist.

Carl Eugen
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
[hidden email] with subject "unsubscribe".
12