<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>
> We tried a couple of examples of using scale_vaapi from the ffmpeg command<br>
> line and it always failed for us on a Intel laptop with Broadwell graphics<br>
> board. For example, something like the following:<br>
> <br>
> ffmpeg -hwaccel vaapi -hwaccel_output_format vaapi -i input.mp4 -vf<br>
> 'scale_vaapi=1280:720'.. out.mp4<br>
<br>
It seems correct line (at least for intel) include a bit more than just scale_vaapi:<br>
<br>
<a href="https://xtechbiz.com/intel-vaapi-encoding-ubuntu-17-10/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://xtechbiz.com/intel-vaapi-encoding-ubuntu-17-10/</a><br>
<br>
Using the vaapi_scaler in the video filters : It is possible to use Intel’s QuickSync hardware via VAAPI for resize and scaling (when up-or downscaling the input source to a higher or lower resolution), using a filter snippet such as the one shown below: <br>
-vf 'format=nv12,hwupload,scale_vaapi=w=1920:h=1080'<br>
You may specify a different resolution by changing the dimensions in =w= and :h= to suit your needs.<br>
<br></div></blockquote><div> <span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Thanks for the URL, it was illustrative ... and now GG is typing ...<br></span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"></span><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">this strategy uses a "complex filter graph" for the video data path . cin5 only does simple filters on the "input pads" via the video_filter= keyword in the decode opts file. This seems to be a "complex graph" on the output path. When you use ffmpeg filters in cin5, the normal filter stack is done using the ffmpeg "plugins". They are really ffmpeg filters that have been glued into the cin5 plugin stack, not into a filter graph. There has been no demand (until now) for a output filter chain. It is probably not impossible to write code for it, but it is not clear why you would use this and not just drop a plugin on the stack to scale the data. There may be a speed gain, but it would have to be pretty attractive before it would be worth adding an output filter graph interface to the ffmpeg encode data path. This method of scaling is not very flexible. The only way I can see that it would be worth it, is that you intend to encode months of video data, and the hardware would improve the rate of encoding enough to offset the software development time.<br></span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">gg</span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"></span><br>
</div></div></div>