here is a simple abstraction that output the real rendering frequency. it help a lot to track this kind of problem. c
Le 09/08/2010 13:02, Lazzaro Nicolò Ciccolella a écrit :
Il 09/08/10 12.26, Lazzaro Nicolò Ciccolella ha scritto:
Il 09/08/10 12.17, Marco Donnarumma ha scritto:
Hi all, it's been a week now I'm struggling to record properly a GEM output, reading archives and forums.
I have fairly complex audiovisual patch with multiple geos, four pix_snaps to create motion blur effect for 1280x320 res, and data exchange through local network. However I can record in a really good quality using both pix_record or pix_write.
The problem is the recorded video is faster than the actual one.
Hi, apologize me if it is a dumb answer, but if you apply very intensive motion bur and other stuf in your patch the speed of what you see in your gem box will be very slow. The sequence of images that is generated will necessarily faster than what you see when the patch is running.
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list