Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="dir" data-source="post: 410180" data-attributes="member: 24485">Any chance that real details could be given instead of just &quot;Use SAF&quot; or &quot;It's built in, you don't need to configure anything&quot;?I understand why you'd want to keep things simple so that the typical user can just set it and forget it, but in these forums there tends to be many of us that would like a little more detail behind what SAF is doing.&nbsp; It's not always true that DXVA will give a better picture and as a long-time ffdshow user, I'm not comfortable with just switching to SAF without more details. As it stands from what I've read, SAF is yet another codec pack.&nbsp; It's just one that's been tuned by a MediaPortal user based on his personal preferences and promoted (by the author) as the best one to use.&nbsp;&nbsp; I haven't seen compelling arguments for it's use instead of ffdshow.&nbsp; Are there or is it really just an alternative for those that don't want to get into the details of configuring things?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="dir, post: 410180, member: 24485"] Any chance that real details could be given instead of just "Use SAF" or "It's built in, you don't need to configure anything"? I understand why you'd want to keep things simple so that the typical user can just set it and forget it, but in these forums there tends to be many of us that would like a little more detail behind what SAF is doing. It's not always true that DXVA will give a better picture and as a long-time ffdshow user, I'm not comfortable with just switching to SAF without more details. As it stands from what I've read, SAF is yet another codec pack. It's just one that's been tuned by a MediaPortal user based on his personal preferences and promoted (by the author) as the best one to use. I haven't seen compelling arguments for it's use instead of ffdshow. Are there or is it really just an alternative for those that don't want to get into the details of configuring things? [/QUOTE]

Verification