Hi Robert, 2009/11/24 Robert Osfield <[email protected]>: > > As for excepting excepting overlap of functionality as being a good > thing, I'm not so sure. Rather I'd much prefer to see properly > distinct examples, and where there is a common problem being solved in > different ways to unify them where appropriate - sometimes by moving > the common functionality into the core OSG.
Yes, I agree with you totally. > For instance I'd like to see recording movies support in the core OSG, > we could us osgscreencapture as a prototype for developing this > functionality but in the end the functionality should end up in the > core. If we get it right it would just be an extension of the > existing ScreenCaptureHandler. Once this is done osgscreencpature > could be rewritten or removed entirely. > > What about osgautocapture and osgposter? In fact I'm not familiar with the performance of PBO, which is used in osgscreencapture and ScreenCaptureHandler. I myself usually prefer FBO, and have a mechanism to maintain a queue of FBO cameras and use them in a loop to render lots of off-screen tiles. This is already implemented in osgposter, to support high-res rendering, and even video capturing and so on without many difficulties. And maybe this is the real value of osgposter, I think. :) If feasible, I would like to try merging osgautocapture and osgposter into a new osgautocapture example, to implement 'automatically capturing high-res images without starting the viewer'. What do you think? Wang Rui _______________________________________________ osg-submissions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org
