[PD] Storing 2D data in PD for Gem use...

[ben at ekran.org]

Hey All,

Anyhow have any suggestions on storing 2D data in PD?

I'll be working with a very large video clip and using gem to jump around
to create the effect of having multiple clips. So I need to store the clip
# and in and out frames for each clip in a nice way.

I'm currently thinking about two arrays one for in the other for out. Only
problem I forsee is the anoyance of getting the in and outs into PD in the
first place... the ideal would be to load a catDV or finalcut log file and
extract the in and out points. This would be a simple parser... I just
wanted to check if anyone has already found a good solution for this...

If not I'll write something and release it sometime. Would be really nice
to do it all in PD... ;) *shudder*

Ben

PS: I do my installations on linux, my daily PD hacking on windows. If I
had my choice I would use a g5 with the radeon 9800... if I could ever
afford such a luxury!


> has anyone experience with live video processing on windows or linux? or
> is everybody using Mac and OSX?
>
> marius.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "chris clepper" <cgc at humboldtblvd.com>
> To: "Johannes Taelman" <Johannes.Taelman at UGent.be>
> Cc: <PD-list at iem.at>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 10:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [PD] system requirements video
>
>
>> >I wonder how fast these two mainstream brands handle texture upload
>> on different OS'es.
>> >
>> >It may not be very optimized in the driver since this operation is
>> rarely used during gameplay, but it's a potential bottleneck for
>> video processing. I expect major performance differences here.
>> >
>> >Did anyone compare nVidia vs ATI on different OS's on this aspect?
>>
>> We actually have fairly extensive data on this.
>>
>> Starting with OSX 10.2 all textures can be uploaded using DMA
>> resulting in 0% CPU time for the transfer.  Plus 10.2 can handle
>> non-power-of-two texture sizes and YUV pixels for even more
>> efficiency.  This applies for both ATI Radeon (not Rage) and Nvidia
>> Geforce hardware on OSX.  Of course GEM fully supports these
>> features. ;)
>>
>> Windows does not feature any of these enhancements in it's standard
>> OpenGL implementation, so significant CPU time can be spent handling
>> the texture uploads.  There might be some vendor specific extensions
>> to enable fast texturing, but to my knowledge none of them have been
>> implemented in GEM.  Windows will be getting system wide support for
>> using video as textures, unfortunately it will be for Direct3D and
>> won't be released until 2005 or 2006 (as part of the Longhorn GDI).
>>
>> Linux is closer to Windows than OSX as far as drivers go with Nvidia
>> hardware, so you can expect similar texturing performance.
>>
>> I can post measured performance data between Win32 and OSX GEM if you
>> are interested.
>>
>> cgc
>>
>> >  j#|@
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PD-list mailing list
>> PD-list at iem.at
>> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list mailing list
> PD-list at iem.at
> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list