Log in

View Full Version : Interlaced x264?

NoX1911
11th May 2006, 16:03
I'm kinda confused... does it support interlace encoding yet? Maybe autodetected via avisynth or sth...?
Daodan
11th May 2006, 16:10
From the changelog it doesn't seem to be able to do it yet. It's still far from final version yet, probably we'll have to wait a while.
Sirber
11th May 2006, 17:00
no interlace support yet. not sure it's a priority either.
NoX1911
11th May 2006, 17:13
Shouldn't be that hard to implement it i think. Some kind of 'separatefields' at encoding and 'weave' at decoding.

But since i cannot even setup GCC correctly i should better shut up. :D
akupenguin
11th May 2006, 17:54
You don't get to say something is easy until you've at least read the 343 page spec.
NoX1911
11th May 2006, 17:56
True... but everything starts with a vision. ;)
soresu
11th May 2006, 22:47
And a heck of a lot of man hours imagined in front of a PC coding it too! :o
Mug Funky
12th May 2006, 15:47
You don't get to say something is easy until you've at least read the 343 page spec.

i lol'd :)

interlace would be good, but considering there's bugger-all out there that'll even decode interlaced AVC, it can probably remain off the list of priorities for now... but i think it should come eventually, because i'm sure many people would like to use x264 for archiving stuff.
Guest
12th May 2006, 16:43
interlace would be good, but considering there's bugger-all out there that'll even decode interlaced AVC STMicro's 7100/7109 decoders handle interlaced streams just fine. There is at least one 7100-based set-top box in production, so I guess that qualifies as "out there".
NoX1911
12th May 2006, 16:59
What about the commercials.. CoreAVC, Nero. Any of these ready for that?
Revgen
13th May 2006, 17:29
CoreAVC Pro handles PAFF Interlacing fine. MBAFF will be ready next month according to Betaboy.
NoX1911
14th May 2006, 21:37
A simple FFE (fixed field encoding) would be sufficient for the beginning. At least better than nothing.
berrinam
15th May 2006, 07:33
A simple FFE (fixed field encoding) would be sufficient for the beginning. At least better than nothing.
I don't get the point of this. You seem to be just suggesting that each frame is separated into two fields, which are then encoded separately (as per normal). You can already do the same thing with AviSynth -- just a separatefields call.
ChronoCross
15th May 2006, 08:51
A simple FFE (fixed field encoding) would be sufficient for the beginning. At least better than nothing.

would be pointless as none of the decoders would support it.