You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The calculation at RDD9File.cpp:112 mPartitionInterval = 10 * frame_rate.numerator / frame_rate.denominator;
does not comply with RDD 9:2013, which says (Annex B, B.6 Table B.2) the partition length should be exactly 10.01s or 9.6s depending on the frame rate (23.98p/25p/50i: 240 frames, 29.97p/59.94i: 300 frames, 50p: 480 frames, 59.94p: 600 frames).
And the test at RDD9File.cpp:769, mPartitionFrameCount + MAX_GOP_SIZE >= mPartitionInterval
means the partitions are all 15 frames shorter than expected.
Under RDD 9-2009, these would both be compliant, since it specifies “up to approximately 10 seconds” (Table 1) and “up to 10 seconds” (8.2).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for the report. I've created #12 which should ensure that the values match the "Constraints of the Conformant Implementation" appendix of the spec.
The calculation at RDD9File.cpp:112
mPartitionInterval = 10 * frame_rate.numerator / frame_rate.denominator;
does not comply with RDD 9:2013, which says (Annex B, B.6 Table B.2) the partition length should be exactly 10.01s or 9.6s depending on the frame rate (23.98p/25p/50i: 240 frames, 29.97p/59.94i: 300 frames, 50p: 480 frames, 59.94p: 600 frames).
And the test at RDD9File.cpp:769,
mPartitionFrameCount + MAX_GOP_SIZE >= mPartitionInterval
means the partitions are all 15 frames shorter than expected.
Under RDD 9-2009, these would both be compliant, since it specifies “up to approximately 10 seconds” (Table 1) and “up to 10 seconds” (8.2).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: