Talk:External filters
From Avisynth
Contents |
[edit] General Considerations
There are going to be a lot of pages here (hopefully). Maybe a namespace "Filters" would be appropiate.
- There remains of course the decision whether the distinction between internal and external should be made. For the moment I tend to prefer differentiating inside the filter's page (perhaps with a template), because what it is external may become internal one day; that way the link does not have to change
- Gzarkadas 14:33, 23 March 2007 (PDT)
- Of course there should be a distinction. Internal filters are supposed to be bugfree, while external ones are for the risk of the user. There should also be a distinction between between scripts and external plugins, because the former are in general slower than the latter. Wilbert 15:08, 23 March 2007 (PDT)
- Yes, it makes sense. Which also means that using separate namespaces is not that appealing at this case (there will be at least three) Gzarkadas 15:25, 23 March 2007 (PDT)
- Any reason not to use categories? (i.e., InternalFilter and ExternalFilter).
- Not at all; since the pages are at the main namespace, categories is a nice means of grouping them. The names should be however a bit different (see Internal filters), say: Internal_filters, External_filters and - for differentiating between scripts/plugins - Plugin_filters, Script_filters. Gzarkadas 21:47, 4 April 2007 (PDT)
- Any reason not to use categories? (i.e., InternalFilter and ExternalFilter).
- Yes, it makes sense. Which also means that using separate namespaces is not that appealing at this case (there will be at least three) Gzarkadas 15:25, 23 March 2007 (PDT)
- Of course there should be a distinction. Internal filters are supposed to be bugfree, while external ones are for the risk of the user. There should also be a distinction between between scripts and external plugins, because the former are in general slower than the latter. Wilbert 15:08, 23 March 2007 (PDT)
- Gzarkadas 14:33, 23 March 2007 (PDT)
Hey Merlin7777, thanks for helping out! It's better to point at a folder (thus the location of a plugin) instead of the zip-file itself. That way you don't have to update anything if a new version appears :) Wilbert 10:04, 13 February 2008 (PST)
As this page now lists both script filters (AVS files) and plugin filters (DLL files), should it be renamed "External Filters"? FlimsyFeet 09:07, 26 February 2008 (GMT)
- Yes, that's fine with me. Wilbert 12:47, 26 February 2008 (PST)
- This implies a change in category name also, which I will apply if no objections exist. And also the opportunity to use the last column of the table (plugin/script) to put a link to the containing plugin's page for each filter. This will be useful for plugins with many filters such as masktools, mvtools, etc. Gzarkadas 05:24, 27 February 2008 (PST)
- Sure go ahead. How about use the last column for that and add "(script)" after the name of the script in the first column (and do nothing for a plugin)? That way the reader can still distinguish between a plugin and a script. Wilbert 12:11, 27 February 2008 (PST)
- This implies a change in category name also, which I will apply if no objections exist. And also the opportunity to use the last column of the table (plugin/script) to put a link to the containing plugin's page for each filter. This will be useful for plugins with many filters such as masktools, mvtools, etc. Gzarkadas 05:24, 27 February 2008 (PST)
New Category under Other Filters: Timeline Editing. Was wondering where CutFrames could go, I think a new category would be needed.
I have a question on what exactly the distinction is between a Shared Function and an External Script Filter ? Some (such as mfToon and mfRainbow) are listed on both pages. Many others are listed on only one, with seemingly no rhyme or reason to it (such as deVCR, which is listed only under Shared Functions, when it is clearly a script filter). As a new user, I'm finding this very confusing, and I missed quite a few things until I discovered there was another page that listed script filters. Should the "Shared Functions" page just be merged into the "External Filters" page, or this this a useful distinction for some reason? Thanks. --Laur 17:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- There is no distinction. The Shared functions article is an outdated page from the old wiki, I believe. FlimsyFeet 08:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Then are there any objections to moving all of the Shared functions to the External filters page and eventually removing Shared functions? To start with I could remove the duplicate entries, and add a note to Shared functions that these should be moved. There is also a shared function category, should the 21 entries in it be moved into different categories so this could be removed? Laur 15:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Go ahead! Wilbert 18:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Then are there any objections to moving all of the Shared functions to the External filters page and eventually removing Shared functions? To start with I could remove the duplicate entries, and add a note to Shared functions that these should be moved. There is also a shared function category, should the 21 entries in it be moved into different categories so this could be removed? Laur 15:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Content
I am going to provide an additional column "Author" to provide the author of each filter. The documentation shipped with Avisynth contains that information. In addition this will help to better identify variations in the case where a different author provides a modification of a pre-existing filter. This will be a change in the template so it will be easy to revert if there are disagreements. The table entries will need an aditional line for each row, before the |- line, but this can be done when the info is ready to be supplied.
As a side effect editors should not list at the same row filter variations from different authors.
Gzarkadas 15:07, 23 July 2008 (PDT)
- Authors (and plugin download) links pose an interesting future problem: the possibility for many dangling links as sites will get moved/vanished/modified. The solution I have came up is to use (parameter-less) templates, one per author / download and use them in tables and text. Gzarkadas 00:03, 24 July 2008 (PDT)
- That's great! Thanks! Wilbert 05:12, 24 July 2008 (PDT)
[edit] Plugins (and other) source-documentation licenses
Editors should review whether the plugin/filter's original documentation is compatible with the licence terms of our wiki. If there aren't (as in many cases), I propose that the main page which describes the plugin/filter should contain the {{Incompatible_licence}} template inclusion command at the top to alert editors that they cannot copy+paste from the original documentation as this would constitute a copyright infrigement. Gzarkadas 14:33, 29 July 2008 (PDT)
- In most cases licenses are not imcompatible, but simply absent. Fizick 13:02, 30 July 2008 (PDT)
- An absent licence is equivalent under modern copyright law to "all rights reserved", that is no right to others than the original author to incorporate, distribute or create derivative works (ie what is done in this wiki whenever someone copy+pastes a plugin's documentation to create a wiki page). Gzarkadas 13:26, 30 July 2008 (PDT)
- Most plugins are under GPL. They docs usually may be considered as under GPL too. Anyway, almost any plugin documentation is incompatible with the wiki. But rewording is O.K. I do not understand what do you want to do with this template. And how apply it. May be simply to add some general note to External plugin page? Fizick 09:03, 31 July 2008 (PDT)
- Do we have a plugin that is not compatible with our wiki, so that we have an example, Or is this for the future? Also can't we get permission from the author to copy their documentation, if that was necessary? --Mikeytown2 16:52, 31 July 2008 (PDT)
- What Fizick says. Almost nobody puts their documentation (from external plugins) under a separate license. Imo, GPL is more a software license that a documentation license, but anyway it is compatible with our documentation license. So, or we need to exclude all external plugin documentation (like we have done with the offline documentation; and say it is copyright authors). Gzarkadas, we have permission from authors (at least from the authors with documentation in the offline docs) to include their documentation in the AviSynth documentation. So there is no need for this template in that case. Wilbert 05:52, 1 August 2008 (PDT)
- I recall, that some time ago I really gave a permission to Wilbert to include documentation of some my plugins to Avisynth offline doc. But at that time there was no any explicit words about CC-SA. Probably same for other authors. So, as Wilbert say, it's copyright of authors. But IMO, the plugin documentations is not "just copyrigted" = "all right reserved", as Gzarkadas says. Author usually puts it to archive with binary DLL and source code, distributes the archive, and permits archive usage and redistribution. So, we may redistribute it, and put to the wiki, but with special note, as Gzarkadas suggested (but I do not understand, how technically). The most important is not forget to give an attribution to author. Probably the best way is crearly mark (quote ?) full original text and do not edit it. It is quite consistent with fair use too. (Note1: Later I EXPLICITLY declared all my filters docs under CC-SA 3.0). Fizick 07:56, 1 August 2008 (PDT)
- What Fizick says. Almost nobody puts their documentation (from external plugins) under a separate license. Imo, GPL is more a software license that a documentation license, but anyway it is compatible with our documentation license. So, or we need to exclude all external plugin documentation (like we have done with the offline documentation; and say it is copyright authors). Gzarkadas, we have permission from authors (at least from the authors with documentation in the offline docs) to include their documentation in the AviSynth documentation. So there is no need for this template in that case. Wilbert 05:52, 1 August 2008 (PDT)
- Do we have a plugin that is not compatible with our wiki, so that we have an example, Or is this for the future? Also can't we get permission from the author to copy their documentation, if that was necessary? --Mikeytown2 16:52, 31 July 2008 (PDT)
- Most plugins are under GPL. They docs usually may be considered as under GPL too. Anyway, almost any plugin documentation is incompatible with the wiki. But rewording is O.K. I do not understand what do you want to do with this template. And how apply it. May be simply to add some general note to External plugin page? Fizick 09:03, 31 July 2008 (PDT)
- An absent licence is equivalent under modern copyright law to "all rights reserved", that is no right to others than the original author to incorporate, distribute or create derivative works (ie what is done in this wiki whenever someone copy+pastes a plugin's documentation to create a wiki page). Gzarkadas 13:26, 30 July 2008 (PDT)
I have a question to clarify these points. If a plugin source code is whatever-licensed and there is documentation distributed with it which does not specifically mention a license, can we assume that the documentation falls under the same license as the rest of the code? J Darnley 12:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- No, we can't. Fizick claims so, but i never have seen any evidence to support that. Wilbert 20:40, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Video Inpainting
Haven't yet found a filter to do this.
Video overlays such as idents (logos,dogs whatever you know them as) on tv broadcasts and the likes. Video inpainting has been whispering around for a while now (few years). Is anyone doing a filter for this with avisynth or any other free user software. We all have zillions of captures i'm sure that need this filter applied to.
Maybe this will get you thinking and talking, maybe take it more mainstream such as your forums. Maybe then we will have such a filter.
Thanks for reading, and pre thank you for any video inpainting filters that come from this note to you all. :o)
- There are two functions using inpainting in "Logo Removal" section (InpaintFunc and RM_logo). There are both based on AVSInpaint plugin by AMSS. Another plugin exist, it is ExInpaint by Fizick. Reuf Toc
