[GEM-dev] RGBA confusion...

[Jack]

Now, with Pd version 0.40.3-extended-20080601, [pix_image],  
[pix_film], [pix_alpah] work fine here.
Thanx to have fixed this Iohannes.
++

Jack


Le 29 mai 08 à 14:17, Jack a écrit :

> OK nice. Thanx Iohannes, I will test it tomorrow with autobuild of Pd-
> ext.
> ++
>
> Jack
>
>
> Le 29 mai 08 à 13:49, IOhannes m zmoelnig a écrit :
>
>> Jack wrote:
>>> Le 28 mai 08 à 21:24, zmoelnig at iem.at a écrit :
>>>> Quoting Jack <jack at rybn.org>:
>>>>
>>>>> For info, [pix_film], [pix_movie], [pix_video] seem to work fine
>>>>> here
>>>>> with Pd-extended (20080524) and GEM: ver: 0.91.0 'tigital'  on
>>>>> PowerBook G4 (PowerPC) and MacOSX.4.11 (using 5.reference/Gem).
>>>>
>>>> so it is only [pix_image] that makes problems?
>>> Yep, it seems.
>>> Here a capture with [pix_image] and [pix_texture].
>>>>
>>>> does the alpha work too?
>>> Yep, it work. With [pix_image], i get blue pixel (in my case,
>>> [pix_image] doesn't work). But with [pix_film], all is ok (normal
>>> too, because [pix_film] works fine for me).
>>> ++
>>
>>
>> i think i might have fixed it in the v0-91 branch now.
>> at least i get consistent (and correct looking) behaviour on both
>> G5 and i386)
>>
>> either try out the new universal binary to be found at http://
>> gem.iem.at/releases/0.91.0/ or wait for the next pd-extended build
>> (tomorrow)
>>
>> fgmasdr
>> IOhannes
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GEM-dev mailing list
> GEM-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev