Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
i have to ask before i accept this.. are there no black bars in that movie?
even
though the video size is 4:3 doesn't mean the aspect ratio is 4:3 also.
mediainfo reports the aspect ratio as a string, and we translate that to either
widescreen or fullscreen. So it could also mean the mediainfo string has
changed.
Original comment by apond...@gmail.com
on 2 Dec 2009 at 8:13
Original comment by apond...@gmail.com
on 2 Dec 2009 at 8:14
Original comment by conrad.john
on 2 Dec 2009 at 8:28
Just checked with GSpot, it reports it as 1.333 (4:3)
And this isnt an exception, I have a lot of old pre-1955 4:3 movies and they
are all
detected as widescreen
Original comment by da.dad...@gmail.com
on 2 Dec 2009 at 8:30
Sorry da.dadoes, but in my case the mediainfowraper seems to work fine. For
example,
I have a movie called "Sherlock Jr." (Buster Keatons movie) and in the file
details
box I can see the following:
Video Width: 640
Video Height: 480
Video Aspect Ratio: Fullscreen
If I open Mediaportal and go into the plugin, I can see the 4:3 logo for the
film, so
it's something wrong with your files :S :S
Regards.
Original comment by riturr...@gmail.com
on 3 Dec 2009 at 2:00
There IS an issue here. i have a 640x480 movie thats getting identified as
widescreen.
We will look into it da.dadoes.
Original comment by conrad.john
on 3 Dec 2009 at 2:34
Reproduced and committed a fix for this in r965.
The problem is the mediainfo.dll version. With the two versions I tested,
0.7.16
outputs "4/3" for the aspect ratio and 0.7.20 outputs "4:3". Moving Pictures
looks
for the former to verify a fullscreen video meaning that when you use 0.7.20,
everything comes out as widescreen.
The temporary work around is to downgrade to mediainfo 0.7.16 (available here:
http://bit.ly/8lnjnt). Or you can wait for Moving Pictures 1.0.1 which will
work
correctly with both versions.
Original comment by conrad.john
on 3 Dec 2009 at 3:32
By the way thanks for the bug report da.dadoes, and thanks for the dissent
riturrioz,
that got me going in the right direction.
Original comment by conrad.john
on 3 Dec 2009 at 3:34
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
da.dad...@gmail.com
on 2 Dec 2009 at 7:30