[PD] GEM pix_buffer

chris clepper cgclepper at gmail.com
Mon Jul 23 20:35:16 CEST 2007

On 7/23/07, Derek Holzer <derek at umatic.nl> wrote:
> A couple questions:
> First: I assume that reading images from [pix_buffer] is less CPU
> intensive than decoding a video file with [pix_film]. Is that true?

Yes.  Reading and writing a pix_buffer is at most a memory copy operation.

Second (and assuming the first statement is true): is there a way to
> dump a whole video into [pix_buffer] without doing it frame-by-frame?

On OSX you can load a compressed video file into RAM using the 'ram'
message.  This will use less memory than pix_buffer but still use CPU for
decoding the video.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20070723/61f52a48/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list