[Kdenlive-devel] Cutting list file format specification, Version 0.02
einStein at donau.de
Sat May 18 20:05:35 UTC 2002
Jason Wood schrieb:
> On Saturday 18 May 2002 6:55 pm, Christian Berger wrote:
> > > I've incorporated the changes that we discussed, and came up with a
> > > couple of other things which we hadn't thought of before.
> > >
> > > Firstly, I have said that each cutting list should start with a version
> > > command. This is important so that we can add new features, and modify
> > > stuff, and know what to expect for any particular version.
> > Well I don't know if we'll ever need it, but it sure is an interresting
> > piece of information. Maybe we should also define a "creator" command,
> > telling us which programm created the cutlist. Maybe also a date and
> > comment field. Those fields definitely are good for recovering broken
> > harddisks :)
> Of course, if you hard disk has died, recovering the cutting list is probably
> the least of your worries -
Or think of undeleting files.
> > > Secondly, I have added a couple of extra parameter value types - String,
> > > ID, and time and interpolation. We need to decide exactly on how time
> > > should be represented within the file format.
> > Well I'd say we use time in milliseconds. Unless we want to be limited
> > to film and PAL/SECAM we have to be able to handle wiered framerates
> > which aren't a multiple of 0.01. We cannot really do that with
> > 00:00:00:00 formats.
> If we are likely to need, say, ten-thousandths of a second for the correct
> accuracy at times, then rather than milliseconds just measuring in seconds
> and allowing any fraction after the decimal point might be better than
> choosing milliseconds.
> Eg. 330.176215 seconds.
This might be an idea.
> The question is, should time be represented in
> hours/minutes/seconds.fraction-of-a-second, or should it be represented as
> just seconds.fraction-of-a-second?
Only seconds. That hours/mintes/seconds system is braindeath, and to
complicated. I mean think of leap seconds and all that stuff. Besides I
don't see why we should base our file-format on the revolution speed of
a planes :)
> > > Thirdly, I have added the interpolation concept. Whilst at the moment it
> > > is limted to simple interpolation between a start value and an end value,
> > > the idea is that the interpolation within a scene should be independant
> > > of the values it is working on : instead of having -startvalue -endvalue,
> > > we have just -value which can accept an interpolation. Whilst slightly
> > > more difficult to parse (though not greatly more so), it allows for a
> > > great degree of freedom for later expansion. E.g. we could at a later
> > > date expand it to allow non-linear interpolations, or to have "freehand"
> > > sets where the value changes randomly.
> > Well I'd do it a different way, I'd do "0 1 linear" Althought this
> > doesn't seem to be much different (now it's encoded in a string) it
> > might mean a lot of flexibility. We could write a tiny little Forth
> > interpreter. This interpreter would interpret the "interpolation" at
> > every frame. On the stack there already will be the current relative
> > time of the scene as well as the length of the scene, and the command
> > "linear" calculates the value based on start and end values. For example
> > if we want to make a linear wipe going in steps we could do this:
> > 0 1 linear 5 * int 5 / which would let it move in 5 steps.
> The main extension that I was later thinking of for the interpolation would be
> some form of "freehand" ability - where you have multiple points, so instead
> of just [start, end], you could have [start, middle1, middle2, middle3,
> middle4, end]
> Of course, then you need to move on to the question of, "what if we don't want
> them all equally spaced out? How do we handle the syntax?" which is why for
> the moment, I think it's best to keep it simple. Since any interpolation
> could be handled using multiple scenes anyway, I think this is one are which
> shows why versions on cutting lists can come in handy!
Well I think here my version is best, since it's a real programm we can
do "anything" in forth.
> > > Fourthly, I've re-structured the document, and used Star Office to write
> > > it. Unfortunately, there seems to be a problem with exporting PDF files
> > > at the moment - the file is now on the website, but only seems to be
> > > viewable using gv. I'm still trying to figure out what's going wrong. I
> > > also intend to add an HTML version sometime soon.
> > Well it looks quite well for a PDF file.
> > On page 1 below the drawing there's a typo, scehduler should be written
> > scheduler, I think.
> > Scenes also can have a length of less than a frame. This might be
> > important if you want to "fill up" scenes.
> ??? I don't understand this point.
> I would have assumed that a scene would be at least a frame, otherwise it
> would never get rendered by the cutter.
Well, but it would create a space in our file format, besides it creates
> > Maybe we should somehow distinguish between file IDs and connection IDs
> > since I have to have a "list" of all the files being used in a scene
> The trouble is that once we get inside of a scene, we would then need a way to
> distinguish between them whilst parsing them.
Actually we have to.
> I think a better solution here is using C++ and making use of inheritance and
Ohh well I've worked with those technices in Pascal, they might be
usefull, especially for the Forth interpreter. However C++ still is not
much more than a smart assembler. Actually our files format can be seen
as a much more sophisticated language than C :) I'd personally prefer
writing it in Pascal which at least has propper string handling. :)
> > Well about the smoothing input of the croma effect (I'd call it
> > cromakey) How would you define it? I mean it'S a color value.
> Ok, here I am thinking that this "smoothing" value determines the range of
> values over which the chroma works. For example, you specify a blue flatcolor
> image as the croma - RGB(0.0, 0.0, 0.8)
> We could then specify another flatcolor video as the smoothing. A higher vaue
> for the color indicates a wider range - effectively, any color with a value
> over 0.5 would mean that the value would always be chromakeyed to some
> The advantage of using a color is that we can specify seperate smoothing
> factors for the different parts of the color value. E.g., since we might want
> a larger range of blue colors to be accepted than their red and green
> components, then we might specify a flatcolor video for smoothing of say,
> RGB(0.05, 0.05, 0.2) (meaning a small variation in Red and Green would be
> cromakeyed, and a wider variation in blue would be chromakeyed). Smoothing
> might not be the best word here - threshold might be better.
> Smoothing would then just be a single value - any chroma effect would get
> "smeared out" a little depending on smoothing to help remove jaggies around
> the edge of the effect.
I understand it. However I think we might wait with it for some time. It
might be to time-consuming to do, but it's definitely something we can
do in the future.
> > Maybe we should try something like this: A forth effekt. The same
> > interpreter used in interpolation could calculate the whole effect.
> > It would be called for every pixel and it get's the pixel values of the
> > incoming images on the stack and leaves the outgoing pixel on top of it.
> > When done efficiently that wouldn't be to slow.
> A simple way to make effects in some semi-intereprative way would be cool.
We can do it that way.
> Jason Wood
> Homepage : www.uchian.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
> Hundreds of nodes, one monster rendering program.
> Now that's a super model! Visit http://clustering.foundries.sf.net/
> Kdenlive-devel mailing list
> Kdenlive-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
More information about the Kdenlive