<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>I found the same behavior, Marian and Peter wrote some amazing software there but you have to have a really fast graphics card for some of the fancier modules. Go with the one that delivers for you. 22 is really nice as I recall. I'll check my rates today
and report back too<br>
<br>
Patrick Pagano B.S,M.F.A
<div>Asst. in Digital Art and Science</div>
<div>Digital Worlds Institute</div>
<div>University of Florida</div>
<div>(352) 294-2020</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
On Oct 10, 2013, at 8:38 AM, "Etienne Landon" <<a href="mailto:landon.etienne@gmail.com">landon.etienne@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<div></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">Hi,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I understand the shader part of ev_pro_22 but I 'm not shure the problem is here, the shader is only used to change texture coordinates and do soft-edging. In both cases, ev_pro_22 or ev_pro_22easy, I send a texture ID. So the chain with ev_pro_22 is not
the one that does the work from movie to texture (the CPU part), it's done once by another chain. </div>
<div>For what I understand, using the same texture ID for different gem chains avoids using the CPU for each chain, you use CPU only to "transform your image, movie or whatever to a texture (which is stored in the GPU memory), then each chain links to the texture
ID which is the position of the texture in the graphic card's memory. Am I wrong ?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For instance, in the same work I do texturing on 200 pmpd masses linked to a gem chain. So 200 independant rendering chains, one texture, and this works without a problem. And there's no shader involved</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Moreover, the texture used for masking is a only one black pixel (see the masking example), so how come this could be so heavy ?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2013/10/10 Santi <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:belfegor@gmail.com" target="_blank">belfegor@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
El jue, 10-10-2013 a las 11:52 +0200, Etienne Landon escribió:<br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
> Is there any reason why ev_pro_22easy is less efficient than<br>
> ev_pro_22 ?<br>
<br>
</div>
I think ev_pro__22 uses OpenGl shaders so it uses the GPU in the graphic<br>
card. ev_pro_22easy uses the main CPU to made the work, so is less<br>
efficient, but it works in older machines.<br>
<br>
Great piece of software the extended toolkit view...<br>
<br>
Cheers.<br>
<br>
Santi Noreña.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span><a href="mailto:Pd-list@iem.at">Pd-list@iem.at</a> mailing list</span><br>
<span>UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> <a href="http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list">
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list</a></span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>