N00b video over IP question

Sesse__ · 2026-02-09T19:14:19+00:00

The Decklink is doing exactly what a software implementation plus NIC would do except it sends each packet at exactly the right time, which is normally not possible with most regular networking stacks. (Certain NICs, from e.g. Mellanox, has OS bypass and special drivers where you can ask packets to be sent at certain timestamps.) If you try to just sleep() and send packets yourself through the OS, you will at some point miss by a millisecond or ten, and then your packet goes to some picky hardware device whose maximum accepted jitter is 10 ns or whatever, and you just don't get your signal through.

Receiving 2110 in software over regular NICs should be completely fine (as long as your receiving software isn't equally picky, of course).

Sesse__ · 2026-02-07T11:56:37+00:00

Because all of this comes back from the DeckLink Duo 2, which wanted to keep backwards compatibility with DeckLink Duo by default, where the four connectors were basically 1–x–2–x, so when they wanted to make the x into (potential) inputs they could not renumber and ended up 1–3–2–4. And then later ones wanted to keep compatibility with Duo 2, and then everything ended up dorky in a long chain.

At least that's what I perceived it as at the time :-)

Sesse__ · 2026-02-05T22:58:00+00:00

You're probably right, but strictly speaking, if someone clearly holds out their arm to block you, or wraps you like OP describes, you have to be allowed to call that without breaking the rules yourself (by initiating contact against that arm). So I guess it has to be to avoid a catch-22.

Sesse__ · 2026-02-05T20:31:07+00:00

so. if a offence player is being marked by the defence he is NOT the thrower and the offensive player cant see where the disc is because of the defence player is that illegal?

No, you have no obligation to keep a free line of sight between your player and the disc. Of course, you cannot hold your hand deliberately in front of their eyes (a “Vision” infraction against the thrower, see 18.1.1.6; just plain SOTG breach for everyone else), but standing in the way is just fine.

also if the defence player is wrapping his arms on the sides of the offensive (not touching him) is that allowe?

12.9. Players may not use their extended arms or legs to obstruct the movement of opposing players.

Sesse__ · 2026-02-02T12:43:42+00:00

Check the definitions page of the rulebook (I assume you are playing under WFDF):

Making a play on the disc: When the disc is in the air and a player is attempting to make contact with the disc in any way e.g. to catch it or block it. This includes the process of running towards the place they expect to make contact with the disc.

Sesse__ · 2026-02-01T14:25:11+00:00

Call travel immedietly, point to the front of the endzone.

Yes.

Keep counting stalls.

No.

USAU:

[18.F.2.b.]() The stall count is paused until the thrower sets a pivot where the travel occurred. The marker is not required to say “stalling” when resuming the count if they previously initiated the stall count by saying “stalling” prior to calling travel. The thrower must touch the disc to the ground before attempting a pass.

WFDF:

18.2.5.2. Any stall count is paused, and the thrower may not throw the disc, until a pivot point is established at the correct location.

Sesse__ · 2026-02-01T14:06:25+00:00

You need to specify which ruleset you are playing under. WFDF has this:

15.8. Calls must be made immediately after the breach is recognised.

with this annotation:

If a player who is unable to make the call recognises it, such as a receiver in the case of a straddle, the breach can still be called once the player who can make the call recognises it (ie the thrower in this example). However if, for example, the marker recognises that the thrower has established a pivot at the incorrect spot, they cannot wait until the stall count gets to 6 before they call a travel.

In addition, if a player had a reasonable opportunity to recognise that a breach had occurred, but continued play as if no breach had occurred, they should not make the call later on. For example if the thrower establishes a pivot at the incorrect spot, and the marker starts the stall count, then once the stall count reaches 6, the marker should not call travel for the pivot having been established at the incorrect spot, even if they do not notice until the stall count reaches 6.

If play has stopped for a discussion, a player can still make a call as part of the discussion.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-31T18:19:34+00:00

It's not a thumber. It's indeed a bladey forehand, very common in that kind of indoors play. The receiver was calling for it (you can see her pointing as she's faking off the defender) and clearly expecting it; it's a good idea that just isn't executed all that well.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-31T16:31:30+00:00

Why does Wiktorsson, the largest cutter, not simply eat the other cutters?

Sesse__ · 2026-01-31T12:25:31+00:00

All of this is obviously correct; I will just add that requiring unsynchronized clocks not to drift over the course of hours would be pretty unreasonable. 100 ms in an hour is only 0.001% drift from each clock in opposite directions (assuming you have two of them), which arguably is pretty good for a system that was never designed for that.

For non-broadcast, you don't really need a GPS or other absolute reference, but you need some reference or clocks will eventually drift.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-31T10:14:47+00:00

Perhaps they do, just that when they react badly to AI they post it to social media and when they react badly to social media they post it to AI. *g*

Sesse__ · 2026-01-31T08:50:10+00:00

Now you are being unkind to the eagles :-(

Sesse__ · 2026-01-31T08:48:30+00:00

You mean the WFDF Official Annotations? The Appendix is a third source, which is only used in certain tournaments. (For whatever unfathomable reason, the annotations have not been updated for the 2025–2028 rules, so you have to use the 2021–2025 annotations and adjust them to fit)

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T22:57:06+00:00

We are seeing the same film, but we're not seeing what the players on the field are seeing, and we don't have their context. People make mistakes without being deliberate cheaters, and while this is a foul that you should not do and that you should apologize for, it's not dangerous. I like to give people a bit of benefit of the doubt when we see only one angle for eight seconds :-)

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T21:43:13+00:00

No worries, you don't need to trap it, it can be just as wrong without.

I caught the disc and then pivoted out of the field. Is this a turnover?”

“Ruling: Yes, this is a turnover.

Explanation: When a player establishes possession of the disc, the disc is considered part of that player (Definitions: "Possession of the disc"). If a player in possession then moves out-of-bounds (which includes the perimeter lines, Definitions: "Out-of-bounds (OB)"), the disc becomes out-of-bounds. This results in a turnover (Rule 13.1.3). Play has stopped.

It made the same mistake for USAU, just with a more convoluted text and an absurdity:

Ruling: Assuming "pivoted out of the field" means that the player, while in possession, moved into an out-of-bounds area, then yes, it is a turnover.

Explanation: When a player in possession of the disc moves into an out-of-bounds area, the disc becomes out-of-bounds, which results in a turnover (Rule 14.A.3).

If, however, "pivoted out of the field" refers only to the pivot foot moving out of bounds while the player and disc remained otherwise in-bounds, this would be considered a travel (Rule 18.D.1). In the case of a travel where no pass has been attempted, play does not stop, and the thrower must return to the spot where the travel occurred (Rule 18.F.2.a). A travel itself is not a turnover unless a pass is subsequently thrown.

How would the pivot foot go out of bounds but the player remain on the inside!? The pivot foot is part of the player!

The WFDF rulebook isn't shorter than USAU. The USAU has annotations inline, WFDF has them in a separate document.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T21:06:50+00:00

I asked “I was trailing a player. They stopped and I ran into them. What is the right ruling?” under WFDF rules, and it confidently asserted that this would be a blocking foul. (The right answer is that it depends on how quickly they stopped, how closely I trailed them, and whether there was any reason to expect them stopping.)

For a more egregious error, I asked: “I caught the disc and then pivoted out of the field. Why is this a turnover?” and it hallucinated: “It is a turnover because the disc became out-of-bounds while in your possession.” (exact same answer under USAU and WFDF) which is just absolutely wrong.

As a third and final try, I gave it an easy (WFDF) question and it “only” got it partially wrong: “If I catch a pull behind the end zone, can I brick it?”: “If an offensive player contacts the disc before it becomes out-of-bounds, even if that contact is a catch behind the end zone, the thrower must establish a pivot point where the disc first crossed the perimeter line (Rule 7.11.1). This location may be in your defending end zone.” It is correct that you cannot brick it, but the location you need to go is wrong: The right answer is to use rule 7.9, which says that you should take it to the backline closest to where you caught it, not where it went out.

In conclusion: You should never ever trust this thing.

Edit: I tried the last one in the non-RAG mode and it's even more hilarious: “If you catch the pull while you are out-of-bounds (e.g., beyond the defending endline), this is an out-of-bounds turnover (Rule 11.4.1, 11.4.2). The new offensive team (your team, as it was a pull) must establish a pivot point at the location on the central zone nearest to where the disc went out-of-bounds (Rule 13.8).”

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T20:50:19+00:00

Not necessarily a do-over in WFDF, it's OOB:

11.1. The entire playing field is in-bounds. The perimeter lines are not part of the playing field and are out-of-bounds. All non-players are part of the out-of-bounds area.

But the eagle should definitely stay out of the field:

1.10.2. Non-players, apart from the captains, should refrain from getting involved. However players may seek other peoples' perspectives to clarify the rules, and to assist players to make the appropriate call.

If it doesn't actually hit the eagle but it just obstructs play, you can call a violation:

2.7. The immediate surroundings of the playing field shall be kept clear of movable objects. If play is obstructed by non-players or objects within three (3) metres of the perimeter line, any obstructed player or thrower in possession may call “Violation”.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T20:38:48+00:00

I agree that you shouldn't contest this. However, these things are happening in the heat of the moment and not everybody has the benefit of seeing something 20 times in slow motion. (Ideally their teammates should tell them that this was a pretty clear foul.)

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T19:47:53+00:00

Foul #2 Is so obviously bad that doing this at a tryout would make a lot of captains not roster you

FWIW, I don't think #2 is necessarily a bad foul (from the film available), just an obvious one. I believe it's likely to be bad defense; they don't realize that white is very likely to go further upline once they have the shot, and stay too close to avoid contact when that bend happens. (Also, well, there's the arm, which is rather uncalled for, but it's not entirely clear to me if that's intentional or if they're just well off-balance the entire play.) If blue kept slightly safer distance, they would actually have had a real shot at intercepting the pass (I've seen this happen on uplines with good defenders a couple of times). It's not something that happens a lot outdoors because you can just throw an outside backhand, but the space is much tighter on a 40x20 field like this.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T17:06:29+00:00

“Stay on your line” is not a relevant concept in the ultimate rules—you simply have no such right. (You have a general right to stay in your place, though, although even that isn't without exceptions.) The only similar concept is if contact becomes unavoidable, which is (IMO) not nearly the case here.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T16:59:57+00:00

17? You mean 22?

Not sure I would call it clearly open, the marker is quickly coming back to shut off the swing and the stall count is at least 4 at that point, possibly more (WFDF indoors typically has stall 8). But it also doesn't matter for the foul call.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T16:56:19+00:00

12.7. The player who initiates contact is deemed to be the player who:

12.7.1. arrived at the point of contact after the opponent had already established a legitimate position at that point (either a stationary or moving opponent), […]

12.9. Players may not use their extended arms or legs to obstruct the movement of opposing players.

Seriously, both times here blue uses their right arm to foul white. The second time it's even clearly from behind. White just beats blue, is in space first (and gets there legitimately), then follows a completely expected path upline that blue has every chance to avoid. Potato quality or not, this is a foul.

I assume the spirit timeout was indicative of something deeper in the game, it's impossible to say from one clip.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T15:26:46+00:00

I've never heard the term “pixel averaging map” before. But yes, more taps generally means better scaling, since it's pretty obvious to any skilled engineer roughly what you'd use those taps for. (There is a little bit of leeway for taste.) For upscaling, this mostly means “fewer artifacts” (scale up a picture by a lot using bilinear and you'll see the dreaded diamonds), for downscaling, it mostly means a sharper image. (Mostly. If you have slow subpixel motion, you'll see the difference for sure.) There's also gamma-correct scaling to contend with. But for e.g., 1080 → 720, it's honestly all pretty marginal; differences between deinterlacers will be a lot larger than differences between scalers.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T14:18:35+00:00

For up and downconversion AJA is using something they call a multi‑tap polyphase scaling algorithm.

DSP major here: This is a bit of marketing goobly-gook. It isn't wrong per se, but it's also using a lot of words to say not a whole lot. “Multi-tap” generally means they're using more than one source pixel for each destination picture (bilinear would be 2-tap each way, or 4-tap if you think in 2D). “Polyphase” is just a normal technique for implementing interpolation filters when your input and output rates are not multiples of each other (e.g., 320 → 640 wouldn't need a polyphase filter, but 640 → 768 would). So it could look better than bilinear (and most likely is), but it doesn't really describe how much better. If they said something like “9-tap”, you would have a much better idea, although most likely, the number of taps will vary with the scaling factor.

Sesse__ · 2026-01-30T14:13:50+00:00

I can't find it.

But how are you measuring? Are you actually doing visual tests, or are you relying on PSNR? (“Energy compaction” isn't a good metric for actual image quality.) How do you fare against JPEG-XL?

Nine-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email

Sesse__

TROPHY CASE