Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
mark stavar wrote: Alas, It would appear that, though my card and glxinfo _say_ they support OpenGL 2.0, it would appear that in fact they do not. (GeForce FX 5700 256Mb) I seem to remember looking into this and discovering that the Geforce 5xxx series only support OpenGL 2.0 with software/emulation of some functions. I also read that you need to put a line in your xorg.conf to enable this but perhaps with newer nvidia drivers that isn't neccessary. You might need to do some googling and/or buy a new card. Some cinelerra functionality won't be accelerated on OpenGL anyway. Somewhere there is a list of which effects get accelerated (try the manual). The order of processing in the effects chain also impacts on whether the OpenGL is effective. Graham ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
On Friday 04 May 2007 14:53, mark stavar wrote: > Alas, > > It would appear that, though my card and glxinfo _say_ they support > OpenGL 2.0, it would appear that in fact they do not. (GeForce FX > 5700 256Mb) If glxinfo says OpenGL 2.0 is supported, it does not necessarily mean that it's supported in hardware. > Definitely, any time I attempt to do anything that might be vaguely > OpenGL related (fades, dissolves, etc), their is a CPU spike and 60+ > percent drop in frame rate. Almost all OpenGL accelerations use shader programs, and I don't think that a FX 5700 has shaders. Dissolve is one of the few that do not use a shader program, but it uses some sort of texture-to-texture rendering, which may be a feature that only newer hardware supports, so your driver falls back to software rendering. -- Hannes ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
Alas, It would appear that, though my card and glxinfo _say_ they support OpenGL 2.0, it would appear that in fact they do not. (GeForce FX 5700 256Mb) Definitely, any time I attempt to do anything that might be vaguely OpenGL related (fades, dissolves, etc), their is a CPU spike and 60+ percent drop in frame rate. Sigh. Might have to fork for some new hardware. Does leave me a little confused though as to exactly what glxinfo is reporting. Ciao, marks -- Mark Stavar Swan Dancer Productions Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: 0410 638 671 http://www.the-writers-retreat.com/ ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 21:48 +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote: > On Tuesday 01 May 2007 06:47, Bruce Bertrand wrote: > > Hmm... I wonder if anyone is having success with OpenGL? > > > > For me, the slowdown occurs even with simple video fades. > > Any time there's any video processing I get very high CPU load and a big > > drop in framerate. > > > > If I just use X11-XV, CPU usage is hardly impacted by fades and simple > > plugins. > > > > Its almost as if the OpenGL processing is being done by the system CPU. > > Are you sure you are running on Nvidia's driver, and not MESA's? > > I have this (SUSE 10.1): > > $ ldd /usr/local/bin/cinelerra | grep GL.so > libGL.so.1 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so.1 (0xb6e61000) > $ rpm -qf /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so.1 > x11-video-nvidia-1.0.8762-1 > > > -- Hannes > > Yes, Nvidia driver...not Mesa Here's the output of glxinfo name of display: :0.0 display: :0 screen: 0 direct rendering: Yes server glx vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation server glx version string: 1.4 server glx extensions: GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig, GLX_SGIX_pbuffer, GLX_SGI_video_sync, GLX_SGI_swap_control, GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap, GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_NV_float_buffer, GLX_ARB_fbconfig_float client glx vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation client glx version string: 1.4 client glx extensions: GLX_ARB_get_proc_address, GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_EXT_import_context, GLX_SGI_video_sync, GLX_NV_swap_group, GLX_NV_video_out, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig, GLX_SGIX_pbuffer, GLX_SGI_swap_control, GLX_NV_float_buffer, GLX_ARB_fbconfig_float, GLX_EXT_fbconfig_packed_float, GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap, GLX_EXT_framebuffer_sRGB GLX version: 1.3 GLX extensions: GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig, GLX_SGIX_pbuffer, GLX_SGI_video_sync, GLX_SGI_swap_control, GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap, GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_NV_float_buffer, GLX_ARB_fbconfig_float, GLX_ARB_get_proc_address OpenGL vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation OpenGL renderer string: GeForce 7600 GS/PCI/SSE2 OpenGL version string: 2.1.0 NVIDIA 97.55 OpenGL extensions: GL_ARB_color_buffer_float, GL_ARB_depth_texture, GL_ARB_draw_buffers, GL_ARB_fragment_program, GL_ARB_fragment_program_shadow, GL_ARB_fragment_shader, GL_ARB_half_float_pixel, GL_ARB_imaging, GL_ARB_multisample, GL_ARB_multitexture, GL_ARB_occlusion_query, GL_ARB_pixel_buffer_object, GL_ARB_point_parameters, GL_ARB_point_sprite, GL_ARB_shadow, GL_ARB_shader_objects, GL_ARB_shading_language_100, GL_ARB_texture_border_clamp, GL_ARB_texture_compression, GL_ARB_texture_cube_map, GL_ARB_texture_env_add, GL_ARB_texture_env_combine, GL_ARB_texture_env_dot3, GL_ARB_texture_float, GL_ARB_texture_mirrored_repeat, GL_ARB_texture_non_power_of_two, GL_ARB_texture_rectangle, GL_ARB_transpose_matrix, GL_ARB_vertex_buffer_object, GL_ARB_vertex_program, GL_ARB_vertex_shader, GL_ARB_window_pos, GL_ATI_draw_buffers, GL_ATI_texture_float, GL_ATI_texture_mirror_once, GL_S3_s3tc, GL_EXT_texture_env_add, GL_EXT_abgr, GL_EXT_bgra, GL_EXT_blend_color, GL_EXT_blend_equation_separate, GL_EXT_blend_func_separate, GL_EXT_blend_minmax, GL_EXT_blend_subtract, GL_EXT_compiled_vertex_array, GL_EXT_Cg_shader, GL_EXT_depth_bounds_test, GL_EXT_draw_range_elements, GL_EXT_fog_coord, GL_EXT_framebuffer_blit, GL_EXT_framebuffer_multisample, GL_EXT_framebuffer_object, GL_EXT_gpu_program_parameters, GL_EXT_multi_draw_arrays, GL_EXT_packed_depth_stencil, GL_EXT_packed_pixels, GL_EXT_pixel_buffer_object, GL_EXT_point_parameters, GL_EXT_rescale_normal, GL_EXT_secondary_color, GL_EXT_separate_specular_color, GL_EXT_shadow_funcs, GL_EXT_stencil_two_side, GL_EXT_stencil_wrap, GL_EXT_texture3D, GL_EXT_texture_compression_s3tc, GL_EXT_texture_cube_map, GL_EXT_texture_edge_clamp, GL_EXT_texture_env_combine, GL_EXT_texture_env_dot3, GL_EXT_texture_filter_anisotropic, GL_EXT_texture_lod, GL_EXT_texture_lod_bias, GL_EXT_texture_mirror_clamp, GL_EXT_texture_object, GL_EXT_texture_sRGB, GL_EXT_timer_query, GL_EXT_vertex_array, GL_IBM_rasterpos_clip, GL_IBM_texture_mirrored_repeat, GL_KTX_buffer_region, GL_NV_blend_square, GL_NV_copy_depth_to_color, GL_NV_depth_clamp, GL_NV_fence, GL_NV_float_buffer, GL_NV_fog_distance, GL_NV_fragment_program, GL_NV_fragment_program_option, GL_NV_fragment_program2, GL_NV_framebuffer_multisample_coverage, GL_NV_half_float, GL_NV_light_max_exponent, GL_NV_multisample_filter_hint, GL_NV_occlusion_query, GL_NV_packed_depth_stencil, GL_NV_pixel_data_range, GL_NV_point_sprite, GL_NV_primitive_restart, GL_NV_register_combiners, GL_NV_register_combiners2, GL_NV_texgen_reflection, GL_NV_texture_compression_vtc, GL_NV_texture_env_combine4,
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 21:42 +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote: > On Tuesday 01 May 2007 03:45, Bruce Bertrand wrote: > > I just got a new video card and tried X11-OpenGL rendering. > > > > Its fine without effects (around 30fps), but when I add an OpenGL effect > > its much slower (around 15 fps ... sound still runs at normal speed > > though). > > > > I'm using Geforce 7600 with the latest Nvidia binary drivers. Other > > OpenGL apps like Beryl and Blender run very well. > > > > When I try to enable an OpenGL plugin I get a lot of the following > > output in a terminal: > > > > VFrame::dump_stacks > > next_effects: > > VirtualVNode::render_as_module > > prev_effects: > > ColorBalanceMain::handle_opengl 0 0 > > > > > > Anyone know what's up? > > Can you make the project available (without the footage, of course)? > > OpenGL works perfectly for me. I've a Geforce 7600GS. > > -- Hannes > > Here's a link to the project file... http://www.filefactory.com/file/c8c3b1/ ~B ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
Section "ServerLayout" Identifier "Default Layout" Screen "Default Screen" 0 0 InputDevice"Generic Keyboard" InputDevice"Configured Mouse" EndSection Section "Files" # path to defoma fonts FontPath"/usr/share/fonts/X11/misc" FontPath"/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc" FontPath"/usr/share/fonts/X11/cyrillic" FontPath"/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/cyrillic" FontPath"/usr/share/fonts/X11/100dpi/:unscaled" FontPath"/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/:unscaled" FontPath"/usr/share/fonts/X11/75dpi/:unscaled" FontPath"/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/:unscaled" FontPath"/usr/share/fonts/X11/Type1" FontPath"/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1" FontPath"/usr/share/fonts/X11/100dpi" FontPath"/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi" FontPath"/usr/share/fonts/X11/75dpi" FontPath"/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi" FontPath"/var/lib/defoma/x-ttcidfont-conf.d/dirs/TrueType" EndSection Section "Module" Load "i2c" Load "bitmap" Load "ddc" Load "extmod" Load "freetype" Load "glx" Load "int10" Load "vbe" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Generic Keyboard" Driver "kbd" Option "CoreKeyboard" Option "XkbRules" "xorg" Option "XkbModel" "pc104" Option "XkbLayout" "us" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Configured Mouse" Driver "mouse" Option "CorePointer" Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice" Option "Protocol" "ImPS/2" Option "Emulate3Buttons" "true" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Generic Monitor" HorizSync 28.0 - 64.0 VertRefresh 43.0 - 60.0 Option "DPMS" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "nVidia Corporation NV44 [GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM)]" Driver "nvidia" EndSection Section "Screen" Option "TwinView" "True" Option "TwinViewOrientation" "RightOf" Option "UseEdidFreqs" "True" Option "MetaModes" "1024x768,1024x768; 832x624, 832x624" Identifier "Default Screen" Device "nVidia Corporation NV44 [GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM)]" Monitor"Generic Monitor" DefaultDepth24 Option "UseDisplayDevice" "CRT" #replace 'string' with either 'DFP' (Digital flat panel connected via DVI port), 'CRT' (any monitor that is connected via VGA ports), or 'TV' SubSection "Display" Depth 1 Modes "1280x1024" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480" "1x1" EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Depth 4 Modes "1280x1024" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480" "1x1" EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Depth 8 Modes "1280x1024" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480" "1x1" EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Depth 15 Modes "1280x1024" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480" "1x1" EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Depth 16 Modes "1280x1024" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480" "1x1" EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Depth 24 Modes "1280x1024" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480" "1x1" EndSubSection EndSection ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
On Tuesday 01 May 2007 06:47, Bruce Bertrand wrote: > Hmm... I wonder if anyone is having success with OpenGL? > > For me, the slowdown occurs even with simple video fades. > Any time there's any video processing I get very high CPU load and a big > drop in framerate. > > If I just use X11-XV, CPU usage is hardly impacted by fades and simple > plugins. > > Its almost as if the OpenGL processing is being done by the system CPU. Are you sure you are running on Nvidia's driver, and not MESA's? I have this (SUSE 10.1): $ ldd /usr/local/bin/cinelerra | grep GL.so libGL.so.1 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so.1 (0xb6e61000) $ rpm -qf /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so.1 x11-video-nvidia-1.0.8762-1 -- Hannes ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
On Tuesday 01 May 2007 03:45, Bruce Bertrand wrote: > I just got a new video card and tried X11-OpenGL rendering. > > Its fine without effects (around 30fps), but when I add an OpenGL effect > its much slower (around 15 fps ... sound still runs at normal speed > though). > > I'm using Geforce 7600 with the latest Nvidia binary drivers. Other > OpenGL apps like Beryl and Blender run very well. > > When I try to enable an OpenGL plugin I get a lot of the following > output in a terminal: > > VFrame::dump_stacks > next_effects: > VirtualVNode::render_as_module > prev_effects: > ColorBalanceMain::handle_opengl 0 0 > > > Anyone know what's up? Can you make the project available (without the footage, of course)? OpenGL works perfectly for me. I've a Geforce 7600GS. -- Hannes ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
Would someone with a working OpenGL setup mind posting their xorg.cong? Kevin or Graham, perhaps ~B On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 22:03 -0400, Kevin Brosius wrote: > On 2007-05-01 19:38, Dennis Schulmeister wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > I think there is something odd in the OpenGL implementation. > > > try this: Have two videotracks. In the bottom one there is video. On the > > > top track there is a small piece of video like in this example: > > > http://www.raldee.net/cinelerra.png > > > > > > Now play this. At the point where the first track has information, the > > > framerate drops from 25 to 7fps with OpenGL. With the X11-XV driver, > > > performance is 25fps all the way. > > > Now the same applies to a simple dissolve in one track. Framerate drops > > > with OpenGL driver as well whereas the X11-XV driver has a constant > > > framerate of 25. > > > > This is exactly one of those problems I described in the thread "general > > cinelerra performance". > > > > > My Card is a Gforce 7800 with the latest NVidia drivers. > > > > My card is a GForce, too. I think it's GForce MX 4000 together with > > NVidia's binary drivers. > > > > My suggestion is that all people with openGL-troubles post the card > > model and driver. I wouldn't be surprised if most of them (including > > myself) are using NVidia cards. There might be something fishy with > > their closed-source drivers. > > > > The 'closed source' NVidia drivers are what the cinelerra OpenGL support > was written against. There was an attempt to make it work on ATI also, > and I believe it is working, but there seemed to be slight differences > in the ATI OpenGL 2.x implementation. > > I don't think the MX 4000 card supports OpenGL 2.x, there is a table you > can check to be sure. > > We have a pretty thorough OpenGL debug info section on one of the > wikis. See: > http://e.kevb.net/lurker/message/20060918.000650.88f48afa.en.html . > > Some additional info about supported cards in: > http://e.kevb.net/lurker/message/20060910.144509.62812886.en.html > But it's probably easier to use the checks listed on the wiki page to > see which version your presently installed card and drivers support. > ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
On 2007-05-01 19:38, Dennis Schulmeister wrote: > Hi, > > > I think there is something odd in the OpenGL implementation. > > try this: Have two videotracks. In the bottom one there is video. On the > > top track there is a small piece of video like in this example: > > http://www.raldee.net/cinelerra.png > > > > Now play this. At the point where the first track has information, the > > framerate drops from 25 to 7fps with OpenGL. With the X11-XV driver, > > performance is 25fps all the way. > > Now the same applies to a simple dissolve in one track. Framerate drops > > with OpenGL driver as well whereas the X11-XV driver has a constant > > framerate of 25. > > This is exactly one of those problems I described in the thread "general > cinelerra performance". > > > My Card is a Gforce 7800 with the latest NVidia drivers. > > My card is a GForce, too. I think it's GForce MX 4000 together with > NVidia's binary drivers. > > My suggestion is that all people with openGL-troubles post the card > model and driver. I wouldn't be surprised if most of them (including > myself) are using NVidia cards. There might be something fishy with > their closed-source drivers. > The 'closed source' NVidia drivers are what the cinelerra OpenGL support was written against. There was an attempt to make it work on ATI also, and I believe it is working, but there seemed to be slight differences in the ATI OpenGL 2.x implementation. I don't think the MX 4000 card supports OpenGL 2.x, there is a table you can check to be sure. We have a pretty thorough OpenGL debug info section on one of the wikis. See: http://e.kevb.net/lurker/message/20060918.000650.88f48afa.en.html . Some additional info about supported cards in: http://e.kevb.net/lurker/message/20060910.144509.62812886.en.html But it's probably easier to use the checks listed on the wiki page to see which version your presently installed card and drivers support. -- Kevin ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
Hi, > I think there is something odd in the OpenGL implementation. > try this: Have two videotracks. In the bottom one there is video. On the > top track there is a small piece of video like in this example: > http://www.raldee.net/cinelerra.png > > Now play this. At the point where the first track has information, the > framerate drops from 25 to 7fps with OpenGL. With the X11-XV driver, > performance is 25fps all the way. > Now the same applies to a simple dissolve in one track. Framerate drops > with OpenGL driver as well whereas the X11-XV driver has a constant > framerate of 25. This is exactly one of those problems I described in the thread "general cinelerra performance". > My Card is a Gforce 7800 with the latest NVidia drivers. My card is a GForce, too. I think it's GForce MX 4000 together with NVidia's binary drivers. My suggestion is that all people with openGL-troubles post the card model and driver. I wouldn't be surprised if most of them (including myself) are using NVidia cards. There might be something fishy with their closed-source drivers. Yours sincerely, Dennis Schulmeister -- Dennis Schulmeister - Schliffkopfweg 12 - 76189 Karlsruhe - Germany Tel: 0721/5978883 - Fax: 0721/5705992 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.windows3.de - http://www.denchris.de http://www.audiominds.com - http://www.motagator.net/bands/65 ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
Graham Evans schreef: > mark stavar wrote: >> I am getting the same results -- my playback is faster and smoother >> with X11-Xv than with OpenGL. Now mine is probably not a hig-end >> graphics card (and a little dated now) but it supports OpenGL 2.0. A >> tad disappointing :-( >> > Hi mark > > Like Bruce you probably have a problem of some sort. I just tried out > the open gl video driver (Preferences>Video Out>Video Driver>OpenGL) > and got 30 fps for the following effects chain playing in Open GL: > camera z enlarge 2.2 (bicubic, gamma (no auto no histrogram), rgd and > chromakey hsv) > I think there is something odd in the OpenGL implementation. try this: Have two videotracks. In the bottom one there is video. On the top track there is a small piece of video like in this example: http://www.raldee.net/cinelerra.png Now play this. At the point where the first track has information, the framerate drops from 25 to 7fps with OpenGL. With the X11-XV driver, performance is 25fps all the way. Now the same applies to a simple dissolve in one track. Framerate drops with OpenGL driver as well whereas the X11-XV driver has a constant framerate of 25. However, when I add an effect (like chromakey) to a single video timeline (not the example above), the performance of the OpenGL driver is much better (25fps) than X11-XV (11fps). My Card is a Gforce 7800 with the latest NVidia drivers. grtz Harm ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
Further to the discussions that have been going on earlier about OpenGL
performance, it did another experiment running a couple of simple fades and
dissolves. With X11-Xv, I was getting around 25 fps (give or take). With
X11-GL and effect was being reduced to about 8, and this appeared on the
terminal screen.
FreezeFrameMain::process_buffer 1 334
Playback3D::print_error:
uniform sampler2D tex;
uniform float h_offset;
uniform float s_offset;
uniform float v_offset;
void main000()
{
vec4 pixel = texture2D(tex, gl_TexCoord[0].st);
{
float r, g, b;
float h, s, v;
float min, max, delta;
float f, p, q, t;
r = pixel.r;
g = pixel.g;
b = pixel.b;
min = ((r < g) ? r : g) < b ? ((r < g) ? r : g) : b;
max = ((r > g) ? r : g) > b ? ((r > g) ? r : g) : b;
v = max;
delta = max - min;
if(max != 0.0 && delta != 0.0)
{
s = delta / max;
if(r == max)
h = (g - b) / delta;
else
if(g == max)
h = 2.0 + (b - r) / delta;
else
h = 4.0 + (r - g) / delta;
h *= 60.0;
if(h < 0.0)
h += 360.0;
}
else
{
s = 0.0;
h = -1.0;
}
pixel.r = h;
pixel.g = s;
pixel.b = v;
}
pixel.r += h_offset;
pixel.g *= s_offset;
pixel.b *= v_offset;
if(pixel.r >= 360.0) pixel.r -= 360.0;
if(pixel.r < 0.0) pixel.r += 360.0;
{
int i;
float r, g, b;
float h, s, v;
float min, max, delta;
float f, p, q, t;
h = pixel.r;
s = pixel.g;
v = pixel.b;
if(s == 0.0)
{
r = g = b = v;
}
else
{
h /= 60.0;
i = int(h);
f = h - float(i);
p = v * (1.0 - s);
q = v * (1.0 - s * f);
t = v * (1.0 - s * (1.0 - f));
if(i == 0)
{
r = v;
g = t;
b = p;
}
else
if(i == 1)
{
r = q;
g = v;
b = p;
}
else
if(i == 2)
{
r = p;
g = v;
b = t;
}
else
if(i == 3)
{
r = p;
g = q;
b = v;
}
else
if(i == 4)
{
r = t;
g = p;
b = v;
}
else
if(i == 5)
{
r = v;
g = p;
b = q;
}
}
pixel.r = r;
pixel.g = g;
pixel.b = b;
}
gl_FragColor = pixel;
}
void main()
{
main000();
}
Fragment info
-
(51) : warning C7050: "b.1-" might be used before being initialized
(51) : warning C7050: "g.1-" might be used before being initialized
(51) : warning C7050: "r.1-" might be used before being initialized
FreezeFrameMain::process_buffer 1 334
All offers of insight wisdom gratefully accepted.
Ciao,
marks
On 5/1/07, mark stavar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks Graham,
I would love to get the FPS you are talking about here.
I am not really clued up on such things. glxgears reports around about
2800 fps. If anyone has any clues as to how I might check or tune things,
I'm all ears -- which makes me look kind of funny :)
Ciao,
marks
On 5/1/07, Graham Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> mark stavar wrote:
> > I am getting the same results -- my playback is faster and smoother
> > with X11-Xv than with OpenGL. Now mine is probably not a hig-end
> > graphics card (and a little dated now) but it supports OpenGL 2.0. A
> > tad disappointing :-(
> >
> Hi mark
>
> Like Bruce you probably have a problem of some sort. I just tried out
> the open gl video driver (Preferences>Video Out>Video Driver>OpenGL) and
> got 30 fps for the following effects chain playing in Open GL:
> camera z enlarge 2.2 (bicubic, gamma (no auto no histrogram), rgd and
> chromakey hsv)
>
> only 4 fps playing in X11-XV
>
> I also noticed that no restart is neccessary to swap video drivers just
> press stop and play.
>
> My video was H.264 video in a mov container and had sound (alsa driver).
>
> I have a pretty good setup with lots of memory but if your opengl is
> working properly you should be seeing a big contrast with the x11-xv
> driver.
>
> Graham
>
> ___
> Cinelerra mailing list
> Cinelerra@skolelinux.no
> https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
>
--
Mark Stavar
Swan Dancer Productions
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mobile: 0410 638 671
http://www.the-writers-retreat.com/
--
Mark Stavar
Swan Dancer Productions
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mobile: 0410 638 671
http://www.the-writers-retreat.com/
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
Thanks Graham, I would love to get the FPS you are talking about here. I am not really clued up on such things. glxgears reports around about 2800 fps. If anyone has any clues as to how I might check or tune things, I'm all ears -- which makes me look kind of funny :) Ciao, marks On 5/1/07, Graham Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: mark stavar wrote: > I am getting the same results -- my playback is faster and smoother > with X11-Xv than with OpenGL. Now mine is probably not a hig-end > graphics card (and a little dated now) but it supports OpenGL 2.0. A > tad disappointing :-( > Hi mark Like Bruce you probably have a problem of some sort. I just tried out the open gl video driver (Preferences>Video Out>Video Driver>OpenGL) and got 30 fps for the following effects chain playing in Open GL: camera z enlarge 2.2 (bicubic, gamma (no auto no histrogram), rgd and chromakey hsv) only 4 fps playing in X11-XV I also noticed that no restart is neccessary to swap video drivers just press stop and play. My video was H.264 video in a mov container and had sound (alsa driver). I have a pretty good setup with lots of memory but if your opengl is working properly you should be seeing a big contrast with the x11-xv driver. Graham ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra -- Mark Stavar Swan Dancer Productions Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: 0410 638 671 http://www.the-writers-retreat.com/
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
mark stavar wrote: I am getting the same results -- my playback is faster and smoother with X11-Xv than with OpenGL. Now mine is probably not a hig-end graphics card (and a little dated now) but it supports OpenGL 2.0. A tad disappointing :-( Hi mark Like Bruce you probably have a problem of some sort. I just tried out the open gl video driver (Preferences>Video Out>Video Driver>OpenGL) and got 30 fps for the following effects chain playing in Open GL: camera z enlarge 2.2 (bicubic, gamma (no auto no histrogram), rgd and chromakey hsv) only 4 fps playing in X11-XV I also noticed that no restart is neccessary to swap video drivers just press stop and play. My video was H.264 video in a mov container and had sound (alsa driver). I have a pretty good setup with lots of memory but if your opengl is working properly you should be seeing a big contrast with the x11-xv driver. Graham ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
Hmm... I wonder if anyone is having success with OpenGL? For me, the slowdown occurs even with simple video fades. Any time there's any video processing I get very high CPU load and a big drop in framerate. If I just use X11-XV, CPU usage is hardly impacted by fades and simple plugins. Its almost as if the OpenGL processing is being done by the system CPU. ~B On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 12:31 +1000, mark stavar wrote: > I am getting the same results -- my playback is faster and smoother > with X11-Xv than with OpenGL. Now mine is probably not a hig-end > graphics card (and a little dated now) but it supports OpenGL 2.0. A > tad disappointing :-( > > marks > > On 5/1/07, Bruce Bertrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just got a new video card and tried X11-OpenGL rendering. > > Its fine without effects (around 30fps), but when I add an > OpenGL effect > its much slower (around 15 fps ... sound still runs at normal > speed > though). > > I'm using Geforce 7600 with the latest Nvidia binary > drivers. Other > OpenGL apps like Beryl and Blender run very well. > > When I try to enable an OpenGL plugin I get a lot of the > following > output in a terminal: > > VFrame::dump_stacks > next_effects: > VirtualVNode::render_as_module > prev_effects: > ColorBalanceMain::handle_opengl 0 0 > > > Anyone know what's up? > ~B > > > ___ > Cinelerra mailing list > Cinelerra@skolelinux.no > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra > > > > -- > Mark Stavar > > Swan Dancer Productions > > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Mobile: 0410 638 671 > > http://www.the-writers-retreat.com/ ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
Re: [CinCVS] X11-OpenGL slower than X11-XV ???
I am getting the same results -- my playback is faster and smoother with X11-Xv than with OpenGL. Now mine is probably not a hig-end graphics card (and a little dated now) but it supports OpenGL 2.0. A tad disappointing :-( marks On 5/1/07, Bruce Bertrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I just got a new video card and tried X11-OpenGL rendering. Its fine without effects (around 30fps), but when I add an OpenGL effect its much slower (around 15 fps ... sound still runs at normal speed though). I'm using Geforce 7600 with the latest Nvidia binary drivers. Other OpenGL apps like Beryl and Blender run very well. When I try to enable an OpenGL plugin I get a lot of the following output in a terminal: VFrame::dump_stacks next_effects: VirtualVNode::render_as_module prev_effects: ColorBalanceMain::handle_opengl 0 0 Anyone know what's up? ~B ___ Cinelerra mailing list Cinelerra@skolelinux.no https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra -- Mark Stavar Swan Dancer Productions Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: 0410 638 671 http://www.the-writers-retreat.com/
