Re: V4L2_PIX_FMT_RAW

["H. Willstrand" <h.willstrand@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Thomas Kaiser
<linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Daniel Glöckner wrote:
>  > On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 10:11:36PM +0100, Thomas Kaiser wrote:
>  >> H. Willstrand wrote:
>  >>> Well, it can go ugly if one piece of hardware supports several "raw"
>  >>> formats, they need to be distinct. And in the end of the day the V4L2
>  >>> drivers might consist of several identical "raw" formats which then
>  >>> aren't consolidated.
>  >> I don't really understand what you try to say here.
>  >
>  > Think about an analog TV card.
>  > In the future there might be one where RAW could mean either sampled
>  > CVBS or sampled Y/C. The card may be able to provide the Y/C in planar
>  > and packed format. It may be capable of 16 bit at 13.5Mhz and 8 bit at
>  > 27Mhz, ...
>  >
>  > If we start defining raw formats, there needs to be a way to choose
>  > between all those variants without defining lots of additional pixel
>  > formats.
>  >
>  > Maybe an ioctl VIDIOC_S_RAW where one passes a number to select the
>  > variant. An application would then have to check the driver and version
>  > field returned by VIDIOC_QUERYCAP to determine the number to pass. This
>  > way drivers may freely assign numbers to their raw formats.
>
>  Yeh, That's something I mean.
>

Okay, suppose we have pixel formats and raw formats. Comparing with
digital cameras raw usually means non processed image in a proprietary
format. What do we mean here?

--
video4linux-list mailing list
Unsubscribe mailto:video4linux-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list