In the case of libav.as an admitted casual, I'm thankful that ffmpeg exists, even if its API confuses me.I'm grateful enough to think that the status quo is just fine, whether I can rationalize it or not.

Besides contributing bug reports and patches, I sometimes like using new libraries (or edge versions of existing software) if the creator, working freely, is trying to move the ball forward.having users who can provide feedback is a sort of moral support.

However, being so dependent on OSS has made me appreciate it and want to support it in what ways I can - call it a moral imperative. Sorry, what's wrong with using free software for moral and ethical reasons? I often do so because I don't feel like paying nor stealing commercial software. That was likely a deciding factor when I last did my nominal research into ffmpeg vs libav: So, any reason for the casual graphics developer to install libav?Įdit: Oh I see that VLC at some point switched to libav. And installing both, I believe, has led to a few subtle errors when using libraries that wrap around either. But by some accounts, ffmpeg has been incorporating libav's changes.and I honestly don't use libav or ffmpeg enough, directly, to really benefit from a better API.

What are the use-cases for sticking with libav these days? I'm almost sure I started using libav because it was promoted as a concerted effort to create a better API.

I know this has been a constant question (in the lines of 'Should I go Python 2.x or 3.x?').but I feel the need to ask it again on the event of a major point release for ffmpeg.but how are things, pragmatically-speaking, in terms of libav vs ffmpeg? I had thought that libav was the new way a few years ago and have more or less been using it on OS X.but now I see that Debian recently switched back to ffmpeg.

Ffmpeg filter selectivecolor example