On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 7:18 AM, Patrice Colet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, it's possible to render on a video file the texture drawn into a > geo object, but the quality is always poor whatever codec we use (even > uncompressed files), that can be useful for having poor animated > textures, but anyway the quality is never as good as we can get when we > render into picture files (isn't it?). > The contents of the framebuffer are exactly what you see onscreen. I don't understand what is 'poor' about the image being read back. > > We can render framebuffer into picture files with the help of > [pix_write], but I don't know any simple solution yet to render directly > into pict files what we can get with the 'unstable' [pix_record]. pix_record on OSX is extremely well tested. I've recorded in excess of one million files with it. > > So my question that will certainly stay unanswered is/ > > What about adding a simple option to [pix_write] for rendering into > picture files only the texture created by a gemchain instead of the > framebuffer? pix_write should just write the pix buffer to a file and not also have pix_snap functionality embedded in it. Unfortunately doing this would break a lot of patches. Maybe pix_image_write would be an acceptable option.
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
