On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 05:29:22PM +0000, monkyyy via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Tuesday, 21 March 2023 at 17:18:15 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 04:57:49PM +0000, monkyyy via
> > Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> > > My current method of making videos of using raylib to generate
> > > screenshots, throwing those screenshots into a folder and calling
> > > a magic ffmpeg command is ... slow.
> > [...]
> >
> > How slow is it now, and how fast do you want it to be?
> > T
>
> I vaguely remember an hour and half for 5 minutes of video when its
> extremely lightweight and raylib trivially does real-time to display
> it normally and realistically I wouldn't be surprised if it could do
> 1000 frames a second.
>
> Coping several gb of data to disk(that probably asking the gpu one
> pixel at a time) to be compressed down into a dozen mb of video is
> just... temp shit. I should just do something that isnt stressing
> hard drives extremely unnecessarily.
You could try to feed the frames to ffmpeg over stdin instead of storing
the frames on disk. See this, for example:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45899585/pipe-input-in-to-ffmpeg-stdin
Then you can just feed live data to it in the background while you
generate frames in the foreground.
T
--
Lottery: tax on the stupid. -- Slashdotter
