I expect that nona-gpu will not be efficient for rendering the previews, due to the overhead of compiling GLSL code for each input image and transferring the data back from the GPU to the CPU before drawing it in the preview window. The approach used by the GL preview is superior in this situation.
This is related to the bug Yuval put in the tracker, which I attached a comment to. If the frame rate and quality of the GL preview are determined to be insufficient, it should be possible to adapt the nona-gpu approach to produce vertex shader programs that would offload the mesh transformation from the CPU onto the GPU. I apologize for not looking at the actual implementation of the GL preview before making this suggestion. This might be nonsense. Andrew On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Bruno Postle <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue 27-Jan-2009 at 08:35 +0100, Seb Perez-D wrote: >> >>There is a difference dropdown, and when you hover over the images it >>shows the differences between the images under the mouse pointer. > > I hadn't noticed, I need to get the manual updated... > > Another reason for keeping the old preview around is that it will > take advantage of the nona-gpu code. > > -- > Bruno > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
