On 12/29/06, Ray Schumacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > At 10:50 AM 12/29/2006, you wrote: > > In addition to what Chris said, is there a reason why you're reinventing > the wheel instead of using available components? > Hi Carsten, > The eventual goal here is towards a streaming two-way server, which > wouldn't use the http, but something more like RTP/RTCP/H.323/ which I'm > learning. It's also a general socket learning exercise for me, as I haven't > used them very much. > I was also using PyDShowCam before, and have switched to VideoCapture since > I'll need to recompile PyDShowCam for py2.4. > I will look into the wx Chris suggested this weekend; more stuff I haven't > used... > > Thanks, > Ray > > For anyone interested, I attached a quick wx I made last night that > monitors a USB webcam, will create "dark" frames (a la astronomy), and serve > up images to web browsers (thus the question). The browser/monitor would > actually work nicely with a web page that has a JavaScript function to > reload the image x times/second. I'll try replacing the PIL with the wx > function(s) and benchmark if they work. >
I just double-checked my documentation and wx.Image.GetData() is not what you want - that's the RGB pixel data, and you want the encoded stream. Using pil to save directly to the output buffer is probably the most efficient mechanism - it doesn't look like wxPython provides SaveStream (or SaveBuffer). Those probably could be implemented (the C++ wxImage object supports saving to streams, and SWIG can make a python FLO look like a stream), you might want to post a feature request. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list