Re: [Gimp-developer] New feature inquiry.

2004-07-22 Thread Øyvind Kolås
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 17:47:05 +0200, Daniel Egger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... with the integration of GEGL and more flexible data
> types it might be worth to look into that again. I'd certainly
> enjoy the idea of doing the composition using the GPU and
> shader programs.

The problem might be when you have some operations that you can
accelerate with the GPU, and some operations that you need to perform
using the CPU. As long as you can assume memory transfers in both
directions are free there is no problem, apart from this hurdle, there
is no reason not do gradually start porting GEGL nodes to use
optional,. hardware acceleration,. sacrificing some quality for speed.
Each node ported would be a separate change,. a wider change would be
to specify the "glitz'ness" as a property of the pixel
representation,. and somehow attempt using that special "blessed"
pixel representation throughout the pipeline,. this is rather
unfeasible IMO

/Øyvind K,
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] New feature inquiry.

2004-07-18 Thread Daniel Egger
On 18.07.2004, at 03:07, Christopher W. Curtis wrote:
And we want it rendered using glitz!
http://freedesktop.org/Software/glitz
... but seriously, does anyone think it's possible to offload 
processing to the GPU?  Is that part of the GEGL pipe goals?  I didn't 
see anything at the site in the docs ...
This has been discussed some time ago and was tossed because
it seemed unfeasible back then, partly due to the hard coded
assumptions in the RGBA rendering model.
However with the integration of GEGL and more flexible data
types it might be worth to look into that again. I'd certainly
enjoy the idea of doing the composition using the GPU and
shader programs.
Servus,
  Daniel


PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Re: [Gimp-developer] New feature inquiry.

2004-07-17 Thread Christopher W. Curtis
On 07/12/04 13:39, Øyvind Kolås wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 13:46:09 -0400, Fredrik Alstromer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all!
The idea has been inspired by photoshop's effect layers, and the basic
concept would be plugins that registers a new layer type. When sampled,
the plugin is more or less simply executed, and the results are cached
until any layer below the "programmable layer" has been modified. Layer
modes and opacity are applied as if it was a normal layer, along with
any layer mask.
You actually want even more,. you want to be able to group layers and
apply an effect to the group, instead of all layers below. An
extensive example with an upside down layer list (should actually be
flippable by just using a proxying GtkTreeModel), where the entire
image contents is generated using procedural plugins and effects is
at:
http://freedesktop.org/~pippin/aluminium/screenshots/bauxite/2004-06-20b.png
And we want it rendered using glitz!
http://freedesktop.org/Software/glitz
... but seriously, does anyone think it's possible to offload processing 
to the GPU?  Is that part of the GEGL pipe goals?  I didn't see anything 
at the site in the docs ...

Chris
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] New feature inquiry.

2004-07-12 Thread Øyvind Kolås
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 13:46:09 -0400, Fredrik Alstromer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> The idea has been inspired by photoshop's effect layers, and the basic
> concept would be plugins that registers a new layer type. When sampled,
> the plugin is more or less simply executed, and the results are cached
> until any layer below the "programmable layer" has been modified. Layer
> modes and opacity are applied as if it was a normal layer, along with
> any layer mask.

You actually want even more,. you want to be able to group layers and
apply an effect to the group, instead of all layers below. An
extensive example with an upside down layer list (should actually be
flippable by just using a proxying GtkTreeModel), where the entire
image contents is generated using procedural plugins and effects is
at:

http://freedesktop.org/~pippin/aluminium/screenshots/bauxite/2004-06-20b.png

At the moment the application where this happens is a testbed, but it
seems like design decisions done there about how to apply GEGL to an
advanced layer stack seem sane.

In it's current incarnation that implementation is disassembling the
current layers into it's more atomic parts,. making the opacity of a
layer an effect layer in itself, creating layers consisting of
multiple atomic effects, is not a problem in this model and would
allow creating a ui that in basic usage is equvialent, (or preferabbly
more equvialent) to the current layers and channels dialog.
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] New feature inquiry.

2004-07-11 Thread Simon Budig
Fredrik Alstromer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The idea has been inspired by photoshop's effect layers, and the basic 
> concept would be plugins that registers a new layer type. When sampled, 
> the plugin is more or less simply executed, and the results are cached 
> until any layer below the "programmable layer" has been modified. Layer 
> modes and opacity are applied as if it was a normal layer, along with 
> any layer mask.

Ideas similiar to this are floating around for quite a while now.
In the meantime there is a pretty clear proposal on how to implement
this. You may want to research about GEGL for more information.

I am not familiar with GEGL but I think dynamically adding new effect
layers was on the list of stuff that should be possible.

> Im not really familiar with the gimp source, and have mostly been doing 
> script-fu stuff up until now. Perhaps this could be accomplished using a 
> plugin? Or maybe it needs to be done in the core gimp source.

It definitely needs a new infrastructure - and there are lots of other
reasons to exchange the current infrastructure. GEGL is supposed to
solve the other problems as well.

Bye,
Simon

-- 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://simon.budig.de/
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


[Gimp-developer] New feature inquiry.

2004-07-11 Thread Fredrik Alstromer
Hi all!
I've had this idea going around my head for a while, and I was just 
going to ask if someone already had this idea (most probably), and if 
any work has been done or planned regarding this. I haven't been 
monitoring this list for very long, so this might be an old and already 
discarded idea. If that's the case, I apologize, and will withdraw to 
the rock from under which I came.. :)

The idea has been inspired by photoshop's effect layers, and the basic 
concept would be plugins that registers a new layer type. When sampled, 
the plugin is more or less simply executed, and the results are cached 
until any layer below the "programmable layer" has been modified. Layer 
modes and opacity are applied as if it was a normal layer, along with 
any layer mask.

Im not really familiar with the gimp source, and have mostly been doing 
script-fu stuff up until now. Perhaps this could be accomplished using a 
plugin? Or maybe it needs to be done in the core gimp source.

Does any one have any ideas or suggestions, as to why this might or 
might not work? Or possibly better solutions?

Thanks for your time.
--
Fredrik Alstromer.
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer