> Currently in Gem, there is not pix_frei0r, although i have not used it, i see a [pix_frei0r] in my install. pdx 43.4 osx
> so again a [pix_effectTV], would be very desirable as well yeah some of those effects look pretty fun... m On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Pagano, Patrick <p...@digitalworlds.ufl.edu> wrote: > One should be able to cycle through both freeframe and frei0r plugins without > having to call it specifically > Currently in Gem, there is not pix_frei0r, I would love if there was but > there are over 100 plugins and there should be a number selector to select > which one for example: > [number 1-x] > | > [pix_frei0r] > | > [pix_film] > > And the same for pix_freeframe instead of for example > Having to do > > [pix_freeframe bloom] > > Also one of the nicest features of pidip is the porting of effectTV effects > http://effectv.sourceforge.net/ > > so again a [pix_effectTV], would be very desirable as well > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hans-Christoph Steiner [mailto:h...@at.or.at] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 1:09 PM > To: me.grimm > Cc: Pagano, Patrick; pd-list@iem.at; John Harrison > Subject: managing freeframe and frei0r plugins WAS: pidip > > > I don't use any of this stuff, but I'm happy help make it easy to use plugins. > I imagine that pix_freeframe and pix_frei0r search the standard Pd path for > plugins, or if not, could be made to without too much work. > > What are the particular issues there? > > .hc > > On 02/07/2013 01:02 PM, me.grimm wrote: >> if we take into account: >> pix_freeframe (it would be nice/easy if when initiaized it looked in >> pd's standard path for a "freeframe" folder maybe?) pix_frei0r (same >> deal) glsl effects (i never did quite figure out an easy way to chain >> effects) >> >> but other than effects that could be accomplished with these, what else? >> >> im curious because i have only used pidip a couple of times but have >> always been able to find a way to do what i desired in gem... somehow. >> >> m >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Pagano, Patrick >> <p...@digitalworlds.ufl.edu> wrote: >>> It has a ton of effects that Gem does not have There is not really a >>> comparison. Gem does not compete so to speak because Gem does other >>> things supremely well >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: pd-list-boun...@iem.at [mailto:pd-list-boun...@iem.at] On >>> Behalf Of me.grimm >>> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 11:08 AM >>> To: Hans-Christoph Steiner >>> Cc: pd-list@iem.at; John Harrison >>> Subject: Re: [PD] pidip >>> >>> i would wonder. what does pidip got that gem does not? >>> and cant those things that it got that gem does not be added to gem via >>> original gpl code? >>> why have more than one vid lib >>> at least in pdx >>> >>> m >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'm not aware of that. Perhaps you're thinking about how pidip >>>> should all be GPL, since it is based on GPL code. The GPL does not >>>> allow more license restrictions, and the pidip license does just >>>> that. So that means that the GPL code included in pidip is still >>>> GPL, but the code that sevy contributed is under his license, and >>>> those two licenses conflict. So basically, pidip is not legal to >>>> distribute in binary form because of the conflicting licenses within >>>> itself. >>>> >>>> Whether you choose to ignore copyright law is your decision. I am >>>> personally fine with people distributing pidip as its own thing and >>>> using it with any of my code as long as: >>>> >>>> 1) the pidip distro is clearly marked as non-free >>>> 2) pidip is not bundled with my GPLed code (i.e. as part of >>>> pd-extended, pd-l2ork, etc.) >>>> >>>> .hc >>>> >>>> On 02/06/2013 11:44 AM, John Harrison wrote: >>>>> I thought there was an earlier version of PiDiP which was and could >>>>> be included with Pd-extended because it was released under an >>>>> acceptable/compatible license? >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner >>>>> <h...@at.or.at>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Just be aware that pidip is not free software because it has >>>>>> clauses in its license that restrict what it can be used for. >>>>>> Including pidip in your package means your package can no longer >>>>>> be legally distributed as binaries since the pidip license terms >>>>>> conflict with the GPL license terms. >>>>>> >>>>>> .hc >>>>>> >>>>>> On 02/06/2013 09:27 AM, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote: >>>>>>> I just finished cleaning up both pdp and pidip libs to be fully >>>>>> auto-buildable >>>>>>> as part of pd-l2ork (including freenect, artoolkit, opencv, etc.). >>>>>>> There >>>>>> are a >>>>>>> number of packages you need to install from launchpad in order to >>>>>>> get >>>>>> all the >>>>>>> externals to build. Stay tuned for the next release coming soon >>>>>>> with >>>>>> these >>>>>>> enhancements... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Pd-list@iem.at mailing list >>>>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>>>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pd-list@iem.at mailing list >>>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>>>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pd-list@iem.at mailing list >>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ____________________ >>> m.e.grimm | m.f.a | ed.m. >>> megr...@gmail.com >>> _________________________________ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pd-list@iem.at mailing list >>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >> >> >> -- ____________________ m.e.grimm | m.f.a | ed.m. megr...@gmail.com _________________________________ _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list