←back to thread

1113 points Bluestein | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
lairv ◴[] No.41278203[source]
I use it to inspect video frames by frames, particularly being able to go back one frame. VLC doesn't support it, this thread about the feature is hilarious https://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic.php?t=120627
replies(19): >>41278382 #>>41278499 #>>41278639 #>>41278719 #>>41279342 #>>41279364 #>>41279561 #>>41279827 #>>41279842 #>>41279920 #>>41280125 #>>41281214 #>>41281733 #>>41282953 #>>41283275 #>>41284169 #>>41287180 #>>41289348 #>>41289743 #
sergiotapia ◴[] No.41278382[source]
i wonder why he's such an ass about it, and totally adamant that it's impossible when multiple players already do this fast. ego?
replies(4): >>41278485 #>>41278542 #>>41278658 #>>41278802 #
variadix ◴[] No.41278658[source]
I think technically he’s correct (I haven’t worked on media decoding code, but I understand how common video encoding formats work). If you have a long video with only a single key frame at the beginning then to step back you would need to, starting from the beginning of the video, decode every frame up to the previous frame you wanted to jump to in order to apply frame deltas, also assuming you have some sort of frame counter to determine when you’ve reached the target frame. In the worst case this does require a lot of compute, but this is an edge case if you primarily care about common video formats with normal encoding settings. I assume seeking backwards is also painfully slow on videos encoded in this manner, so why stepping back 1 frame is out of the question when compared to seeking backwards, I don’t fully understand, it must have something to do with precise frame counts being unavailable on some hardware decoders for some formats (and there being no good workaround) so you _may_ not actually go back 1 frame.

I don’t see any reason it couldn’t be supported for a set of formats with reasonable encoding/decoding settings, and provide some error message for other formats if a user attempts to step back, e.g. reverse frame stepping unavailable for current video due to format/encoding/decoding settings.

replies(7): >>41279035 #>>41279159 #>>41279175 #>>41279309 #>>41281273 #>>41281805 #>>41283553 #
scottlamb ◴[] No.41279309[source]
> If you have a long video with only a single key frame at the beginning then

...you can't support the scrub bar efficiently either, so no one encodes video that way.

Typically to go to a frame you find the last IDR frame before it (and in reasonable encodings those are frequent enough) and decode forward until you get to the frame of interest. Doing that every time the user presses the single frame back button really doesn't seem that bad, and neither does holding onto some extra reference images for at least like 1080p frames. (8k video and such starts getting more expensive but maybe even then start doing all some references after the first press of the frame back button in this GOP or some such.)

It's of course work to do, and I'm not super motivated to send them that patch, and there's the question of it it would be merged and maintained indefinitely, but what folks are asking for is technically possible.

> I don’t see any reason it couldn’t be supported for a set of formats with reasonable encoding/decoding settings, and provide some error message for other formats if a user attempts to step back, e.g. reverse frame stepping unavailable for current video due to format/encoding/decoding settings.

Yeah, this. That's likely more or less what they already do with the scrub bar.

replies(1): >>41279905 #
mtrower ◴[] No.41279905[source]
> It's of course work to do, and I'm not super motivated to send them that patch, and there's the question of it it would be merged

That's my issue; he calls for people to send patches, but anyone capable of writing such a patch is also probably going to see that he's not positive on the matter, and that his "patches welcome" is really pretty passive aggressive in this instance. At least, that's how it comes off to me. I would expect that, should I submit such a patch, it would simply be rejected on the basis that "it is not a general solution".

replies(2): >>41280328 #>>41280650 #
1. ruszki ◴[] No.41280650[source]
I learned this the hard way.

One other team at my workplace insisted that they can’t make their product compatible with our product, because it would take a team and half year. I knew that it’s a lie, but we convinced them to “allow” us to make for them. I finished - alone - in four days.

It was never merged. It was purely political. It was never about whether it’s possible or not.