[Kdenlive-devel] Cutting List Specification Version 0.04

[Rolf Dubitzky]

On Saturday 16 November 2002 05:11 pm, Christian Berger wrote:

> I opose to the format of time unless there is a clear definition of what
> is meant by frames.
> Video (especially NTSC) doesn't have the same amount of frames per second.
> I see no way of calculating time-differences in a HH:MM:SS:FF format.

Why? if you have integer fps (as in PAL/NTSC/anything) it's trivial. Convert 
to frame numbers, subtract, convert back to time format.

> Besides both formats are hard to parse as well as hard for humans to read.

I don't agree. As I said, I have not many different commercial editors, but 
the three I know all display time in hh:mm:ss.ff, where ff is max 30 for NTSC 
and max 25 for PAL. Very easy to read for me. Any non-frame based format will 
severely suffer from rounding errors, like in the suggestion I made:

 HH:MM:SS.mmm   

where .mmm are milliseconds. Together with fps of the sample it's possible to 
calculate the right frame, but not easy in NTSC.

Anyway, I want to stress, that merging video with different framerates is not 
that simple. Already NTSC<->PAL is very difficult when done non-interlaced.
It's nothing wrong about keeping this option in mind, but I would not waste 
too much time and energy on this topic at this point.

Cheers,
Rolf

***************************************************************
 Rolf Dubitzky  
 e-mail: Rolf.Dubitzky at Physik.TU-Dresden.de
 s-mail see http://hep.phy.tu-dresden.de/~dubitzky/
***************************************************************