Hey, I wouldn't mind working on the graphics, I just don't know where to start or who else is working on it.
Jan On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 09:18 , Steve Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent: >On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 11:45:53 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote: >> VST plugins tend to be rather complex, offering tons of features and >> eyecandish GUIs, while LADSPAs usually offer limited functionality, no >> GUI at all(hosts usually provide simple ones to control the parameters). >> But what's interesting is that each LADSPA plugin usually implements >> exactly one type of DSP technique, for example, an oscillator, or a >> delay. This basically leads to a situation where a certain DSP technique >> is 'isolated' in a separate plugin. > >I think thats down to two factors (and its not a good thing) > >1) LADSPA developers are few in number and short in time. The basics are a > good place to start. > >2) The lack of a UI standard makes complex plugins a bit pointless. > >There are a few counter examples (e.g. my VyNil plugin wraps a lot of >different bits), and infact if you look in many LADSPA plugins you will >see theres really more going on than there appears to be. > >[OT] - my canned plugin writing experience - all generalisations and IMHO > of course > > Time breakdown: 10% writing code, 10% maths and optimising, 80% tweaking > and tuning. > > Mapping the controls 1:1 with DSP parameters makes plugins crap - people > say they want that if you ask them, but they dont mean it ;) > > Fewer controls is better. > > Affordance, appearance and usability has as much affect on the perceived > sound quality as the DSP code (posivly and negativly). Some of this can > be achieved without a custom UI. > >You mentioned JAMin - true that does use LADSPA plugins - but of the total >ammount of code the LADSPA plugins are a tiny fraction. I just reused them >because I hate fixing bugs in two places :) > >[OOT] I used to think that a UI spec for LADSPA (to make it competetive >with VST) was a technological problem. I now thinks its a manpower issue >(I think Paul Davis pointed this out a couple of years ago :). Games >develpment has moved to the point where the graphics work is more >expensive than the software development, and I bet its not far off in >plugin / eyecandy app development. We have no, or almost no, graphics >people here. > >There are plenty of graphics people working on Free Software projects, but >they all seem to be working on games projects. What a waste. I guess >drawing goblins is more fun than sliders and LEDs. Who knew? ;) >
