Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: FrameConverter only copies upper square on portrait-format video #460

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 11, 2024

Conversation

lannybroo
Copy link
Contributor

FrameConverter should be copying lines for the height of the image, not the width. Width happened to work since most test videos are landscape.

Motivation and Context

Portrait videos do not play properly, only rendering the upper (width x width) part of the video.

Description

The change is a one-line fix in the FrameConverter's convert method where a decoded frame is put into a ByteBuffer.

How Has This Been Tested?

Tested on a few different portrait-format videos I had handy and on a set of landscape video I usually work with. Not extensively tested.

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

It should be copying lines for the height of the image, not the width. Width happened to work since most test videos are landscape.
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Mar 3, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 90.84%. Comparing base (d05758b) to head (3aa5182).

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##                2.x     #460   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     90.84%   90.84%           
  Complexity     6068     6068           
=========================================
  Files           660      660           
  Lines         15876    15876           
  Branches       1515     1515           
=========================================
  Hits          14422    14422           
  Misses         1410     1410           
  Partials         44       44           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests-api 98.39% <ø> (ø)
unittests-api-ffmpeg 15.85% <100.00%> (ø)
unittests-awt 98.60% <ø> (ø)
unittests-core 98.44% <ø> (ø)
unittests-geoid 100.00% <ø> (ø)
unittests-mimd1 91.17% <ø> (ø)
unittests-mimd2 85.36% <ø> (ø)
unittests-mimdbase 100.00% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st0601 99.30% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st0602 77.64% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st0805 99.17% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st0806 99.64% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st0808 99.08% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st0809 99.11% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st0903-vmti 98.75% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st0903-vtrack 97.09% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1002 98.95% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1010 98.55% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1108 99.66% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1202 100.00% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1206 99.59% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1301 98.91% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1403 100.00% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1601 100.00% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1602 100.00% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1603 98.03% <ø> (ø)
unittests-st1909 99.65% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Collaborator

@bradh bradh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM.

@bradh
Copy link
Collaborator

bradh commented Mar 3, 2024

Looks like the QA failure is unrelated. Have proposed fix at #461.

@wlfgang wlfgang merged commit a363f5f into WestRidgeSystems:2.x Mar 11, 2024
4 of 5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants