We've been very interested in implementing a custom show runner with a focus on making cues for reliable routing of multichannel audio and multichannel video. I built a player in Max6 to get 3ch video 2ch audio for somebody's show and it ran pretty well. However, when trying to implement the same code for a piece that relied on having very consistent, very smooth HD video, we couldn't maintain a consistent framerate. Ultimately, we used QLab, but we'd prefer to not need their expensive licenses.

I'd be interested to know benchmarks for multichannel audio and HD video playback using Pd/GEM. We hadn't investigated it since I assumed Jitter rendering to GPU with HAP should be better than what GEM can do, but I would be ecstatic to go to Pd for this if the playback performance was good.

Thanks,
-Stephen

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Simon Wise <simonzwise@gmail.com> wrote:
On 17/11/14 04:53, Pagano, Patrick wrote:
I would love to see this idea expanded or developed. The issue i have run
into over and over again is that pd would need to be CUED from patch to patch
so one could design a linear show. I have not seen this possible the way it's
designed. For this reason i use Isadora,

I often trigger one patch from another, on the same machine or other machines ... or trigger many patches from a single simple master patch used to run a show, with just the cues and/or follow-ons plus maybe an overall volume or such that gets sent to all the patches. Essentially it is very easy to make a single interface patch to do the kinds of things Isadora and others have as a built-in GUI layer. I usually use [netsend], it is almost as straightforward as [send] locally, and fairly trival onto a local network. But there are other options. The fact that I can trigger to and from scripts in exactly the same way, using pdreceive, is great.

I have not used Isadora for many many years .... I switched to Pd exactly because I was frustrated with the limitations the built-in workflows, GUIs and assumptions imposed, and the frustrating inflexibility of OSX ... Isadora is designed for and tested with a particular workflow and if that matches your own workflow then it may be a very sensible choice for you, likewise for choosing OSX ... one big advantage of that built-in approach is exactly that it is limited to the commonly needed features and hence it is always familiar, and requires less configuration and less under-the-hood knowledge than a more general and flexible system.


Simon


_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list