But please keep in mind to keep the credits in the function as I did wrote it in the beginning of this thread where the fuction is quoted ... there you can also add yourself in the credits mentioning your additions
Thanks

Don't take it bad but you don't own the equations. You are method's owner and, of course, method's credits 100 %, but not own the script since it only has, maybe, 10 % of your code. In any case, I don't want include any credit line, as I don't like unnecesary text lines.

In addition, if you allow me it, it is a triviality, since that who copy the script, first that will do will be to erase the credits.

My friend thats what I saw and interpreted therefore right

The slicer() function DOES exactly base on MY week-filling developemend/testing and your further developement (which I do apriciate) does EXACTLY enjoy primary the purpose of the slicer() function and its idea and purpose to give a combination of a GOP based + %based + offset prediction + encoder independence.
Every addition like more Subs or the CDsize stuff from the other functions of the other Prediction thread are nice, do make it mor comfortable BUT the purpose of the script DOES base on the main core.

You can't take sources/Ideas from other people ... give them some adds (which is good) and then just kill the credits of the origin by using the argument "avoid text lines" as they don't make processing slower.
Thats also the main problem of the purpose of "OpenSource" like Kwag explained some time ago.

What do you think would "mf" from doom9 do if I take his "mf_toon.avsi"... adding some nice parts and do offer that one without pointing to the creator of the core?? That would cause ver much misunderstandings.

We're her to develope, and therefore to provide our developings.

And no matter if users do delete something afterwards or not ... here we are talking about the source condition for providing!
Some time ago I just offered GripFit_YV12.dll on my mirror and for shure I got a mail from the owner that I have to provide the FULL package, means also the license/credits text file.

So I tell you seriosly do add again these remarks as they where and do add your lines about your additions and whats about your additions!

Im very sensible on this, so you have to understand friendly as in the past I learned much from situations where things like these are not CLEARLY spoken out . Even Avalon keeped the credits when he integrated slicer() in his mencoder GUI for prediction (well he didn asked me, but for shure there is nor reason to ask as he keeped the credits ad as Slicer() is free for every user)

@Prodater64,

Please put ALL original credits back on the top of the script

-kwag

That is done.
Can you now, please, delete this and 3 previous posts.
I don't want somebody think about me that I'm like this people like Inc mentioned.
BTW, nobody needs to be so imperative with me.

Nobody thinks that you could be like people I mentioned ..... cause now you understand.

It was just a very clear "hint" (not imperative at all) that your posting before showed a "little" attitude as a reaction of my little advice before and that was the subject of the last few postings .... and now clearyfied.

Con saludos a palma
Inc.

Thanks Inc.


And now, most important, do you like it?

Hi Prodater64 I have a quick question about the above lines in the script:


the script beneath that is that the MA opt script?

If so would you need to change it for a DivX source?

Thanks in advance for you help.

__________________
Regards.

Michael.

@ Zyphon

That part is the optimal AVI script V4

The "little" Problem is .... Prodater64 did "split" the function into 2 fragments:

1. Variables and Encoding Script

2. The function

Better would be (as it was orig. before)...
... just an .avsi function including the varaibles and everything for slicing which can be put in the avs plugins directory. So you just can take every encoding script you want and just add below slicer() incl. its arguments.

Before it was more flexible in its settings .... but Prodater64 did add some calculation techniques as you can read above so noobs can just enter cd size and so on.

And thats also my answer to you Prodater64 ... sorry for responding that late!
I did try it but .... and thats only IMHO ... I stay with my version as I am more flexible and so I can use the more "risc"(reduced) based function also to do much more other things .... like the case we are discussing in the latest "Crazy Idea got into my mind"-thread from Kwag, where future predictions "could" be done not with only a ping and pong, but also with multiple randomly offsets.

This is is great Inc.
My mod is only intended for not automatic calculation, offering a little bit more information than your slicer original function.

This is your personal opinion. If both functions throw similar results the users have to decide which to use.

Sorry if I do seem now upset but your last opinion/sentence makes me writing the following....

To me it seems that you still dont understand all this whole princip of COOPERATION on other peoples developement roots/cores
I thought we have been through this. And I dont know why its getting that complicated now as the postings above did explain everything.

If you want help developing the function named Slicer() and its state, we can work together, and I do apreciate that very much!
BUT I want to keep "Slicer()" easy to use and compact and not to be provided in two parts.

An easy explanation example (as I see its necessary):Go an get the function 60ito24p.avsi from Sharfis_Brain ... do change things where the author does not totally agree with as it gets more confusing in his eyes and release it under the same name .... you know what will be happen if you say to him "let the users decide which to choose".
I dont know why I have to explain that to you. BEACUSE there wont be the conclusion ... let the users decide (and exactly that is your opinion which makes me writing these lines)

Inc.

Your seem is wrong.
You make it complicated.
It didn't explain exactly. First, Zyphon question was for me (Prodater64). Second, if you say The problem is for you. All other people can like, or better love it.
I repeat, it is only your personal opinion.
I don't want specially help slicer() developement. Just I saw the function and I though enhace it. And I think it was enhanced in some sense. You think that no. Well, is not our problem. People will decide what use of both.
But not agreement with my mod is only your problem. More confusing in your eyes, who know in other people eyes?
Want you that I change the function name? Not problem. But the function is yours (it is only tweaked for me), but the mod is mine, and I only want that people test it, but I don't go on saying,
I also don't know it. I don't needed any explanation about it.
The function is yours, the mod is mine.
I know it clearly and I don't need further explanations.
You don't need "ojo", maybe "ojos cerrados" (closed eyes). I mean you can calm sleep, I'm not a thief.

I did explain that by the case of avsi's from MF or the 60ito24p.avsi function. Didnt you read these lines, wherent they understandable and reasonable????? Maybe not as you didnt quote that one but all other lines ... but they where the most important.

The problem is not! basically that someone does a mod, its your way of handling the approach .... first deleting credits and argumenting "why" (some postings above, you remeber?).... and continued by your last point of views.

@Incredible

Thanks for the info buddy it is much appreciated.

Also im sorry that my question has caused an argument between Incredible and Prodater64 that was not my intention I just wanted to simply understand Prodater64 script as well as Incredible's one.

For Prodater64 script is I use DVD source do I then replace that opt script with the MA then?

__________________
Regards.

Michael.

Because it's Incredible's script, why don't people make suggestions to him, for improvements, and let HIM (Incredible) decide what goes in and out
It is Incredible's original idea. Isn't it

-kwag

I agree, its Incredible's baby after all.

Nice work with Slicer btw Inc.

__________________
Regards.

Michael.

@Kwag, sometimes you (like inc) have a closed mind. Sometimes you are a little partial. (Inc is your friend and me less than him, or not at all, I don't kow it).
I had enhanced slicer() function (is my opinion). You like it, use it, you don't like it, don't use it, is very, very easy, isn'nt it? The Ziphon question was about my mod, nor about slicer() function. He wanted to test it and compare with slicer() function. It is what must to concern to people. People uses quenc, other mencodeme, other mencoder.exe, other ffvfw. All this software uses libavcodec. People choice up to they and not problem isn'it?
What happend, Is it, that I had stole a closed source?
Please!!!

@Inc: Don't carry here credits problems again, I was wrong and I repair my mistake. I have right of take anything here and enhance, use or no use, since it is public. And I still keeping your credits and never wanted take your credits.
Can you understadn that?

Better dedícate to useful things and not to waste the time with trivialities.
If you reply this post, I will not reply you again. I do not waste my time in trivialities. (Although surely you will think that it is not a trivialitie, but we all can think what we want).

Hey Prodater64,

Cool down
It's just that Inc. originally did the script (and the logic behind it), so it would be nice to "submit" your enhancements to him, and let him decide what goes in and what goes out.
However, if you want to re-write everything, where your script is substantially different than Inc's script, then by all means, go ahead
(Just make sure that Inc's code left is less than 10% )
And as for Inc. being my friend, and you less that him
Why would you say that
Slow down on the "Vino Tinto"



-kwag

But it is so good, maybe two bottles is so much!

ONE bottle is enough to put me to sleep, of course, after eating half pound of "Jamon Serrano" (Prosciutto)
TWO bottles, will put me to

-kwag