Old 5th April 2004, 05:28   #1
Tuggummi
Bin King
 
Tuggummi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 2,173
linesize capped?

Well while trying to do a fullscreen linear gradient with one superscope alone and with the help of linesize, i noticed that for some very very odd reason it is capped at certain point and it doesn't fill the whole screen

Just try to make a fullscreen gradient with:
frame
linesize=w ; n=h

pixel
y=i*2-1 ; x=0 ; red=i ; green=red ; blue=red


I think the linesize is a very powerful and useful variable and i can't just understand why it is limited this way... I hope they could update this or we will have to go on using a superscope and a movement

Texer Resources

Im retarded... err i mean retired!
Probably both...
Tuggummi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2004, 14:22   #2
TomyLobo
Major Dude
 
TomyLobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 580
yes, i noticed that too i think it's capped at 256

If you can't say something nice, say something surrealistic.
TomyLobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2004, 22:25   #3
hungryskull
Major Dude
 
hungryskull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in Canada
Posts: 776
Never noticed that before, kinda stupid.

Darn, I can't think of anything to put here.
hungryskull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2004, 05:26   #4
Jaak
Major Dude
 
Jaak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Estonia.
Posts: 851
I think it is 255 not 256 and its not stupid at all, you can use
unsigned char in c++ that ofcourse optimizes avs code, but do you really need more line width?

Phi = (1+sqrt(5))/2
Jaak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2004, 05:37   #5
Tuggummi
Bin King
 
Tuggummi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 2,173
Jaak...
Now would i be posting this and whining and bitching about it if i would be happy with such great restrictions.

Now if i make a simple 2D square by using linesize, i want it to look correct even at 1024x768 resolution. And if i want to make a linear fullscreen gradient i sure as hell want that to look correct in all resolutions.

The coded parts in the new avs version seem to run so fast that a single linesize free superscope would be faster than the superscope+movement combo /me thinks. Also i wouldn't have to use a effect list if i for example want to multiply blend it with something, just misc render mode and voilá!

Texer Resources

Im retarded... err i mean retired!
Probably both...
Tuggummi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2004, 14:28   #6
TomyLobo
Major Dude
 
TomyLobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 580
Lightbulb single SSC fullscreen gradient :)

you need a single superscope fullscreen gradient? here it is
tested at 1152x864
it's done using the same system you use when wallpapering
it simply does multiple gradients next to each other
Attached Files
File Type: zip tomylobo - ssc fullscreen gradient.zip (464 Bytes, 119 views)
TomyLobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2004, 21:24   #7
UnConeD
Whacked Moderator
 
UnConeD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,104
if (lw<1) lw=1;
else if (lw>255)lw=255;

Yup.

UnConeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2004, 06:23   #8
Tuggummi
Bin King
 
Tuggummi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 2,173
Ok, now do me a square that is 50% size of the screen, with linesize.
After that do me a solid oscilliscope that is 75% of the height, with linesize.

Texer Resources

Im retarded... err i mean retired!
Probably both...
Tuggummi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2004, 07:22   #9
TomyLobo
Major Dude
 
TomyLobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 580
ok you won

If you can't say something nice, say something surrealistic.
TomyLobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2004, 07:53   #10
Tuggummi
Bin King
 
Tuggummi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 2,173
I just want it to be fixed, not a alternative solution. I don't think that it's a sin to ask for it

Texer Resources

Im retarded... err i mean retired!
Probably both...
Tuggummi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2004, 23:31   #11
dirkdeftly
Forum King
 
dirkdeftly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Cydonia, Mars
Posts: 2,651
Send a message via AIM to dirkdeftly
it is. there is absolutely no feasable reason any sane man would ever, ever want to have a line width greater than 64 to begin with. there are alternative ways to make gradients. i don't think i have to ennumerate them for you.

"guilt is the cause of more disauders
than history's most obscene marorders" --E. E. Cummings
dirkdeftly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2004, 01:48   #12
hungryskull
Major Dude
 
hungryskull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in Canada
Posts: 776
Just wanted to point this out, sorry.

Quote:
I just want it to be fixed
If Jaak is right about why it doesn't work, then it isn't really a bug, but a slightly overly agressive optimization. So it needs to be changed, not fixed.

Darn, I can't think of anything to put here.
hungryskull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2004, 07:19   #13
Tuggummi
Bin King
 
Tuggummi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 2,173
Atero, and i don't think i have to tell you the slowness of using a fullscreen solid scope with something like s=bnot(s) or a scope, movement and effect list just to get a different blend mode than replace.

Texer Resources

Im retarded... err i mean retired!
Probably both...
Tuggummi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2004, 15:34   #14
hungryskull
Major Dude
 
hungryskull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in Canada
Posts: 776
Slowness isn't the only problem, if you use s=bnot(s) it gets less solid looking when the window gets bigger which forces you to use crazy high values for n.

Darn, I can't think of anything to put here.
hungryskull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th April 2004, 20:26   #15
anubis2003
Forum King
 
anubis2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: middle of somewhere
Posts: 5,564
Send a message via AIM to anubis2003
using unsigned char's isn't a speed optimization though... using UCHARs will actually be slower than using int's. Modern processors run fastest with 32bit data so it would actually make more since to use int's. I think tuggummi's request is 100% valid.
anubis2003 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th April 2004, 02:17   #16
UnConeD
Whacked Moderator
 
UnConeD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,104
It doesn't actually use unsigned chars, it just caps the linesize.

UnConeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th April 2004, 19:03   #17
Warrior of the Light
Forum King
 
Warrior of the Light's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 4,082
Another downside of the s=bnot(s) thing is the 1 pixel shift. You won't notice this on n=w(or h)*2+2 with 100% fill, but it is inaccurate. If the problem could be changed, this would be an optimization. It sure is faster and more accurate.

Jesus loves you [yes, you] so much, he even died for you so that you will not need to die, but live forever
Warrior of the Light is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Visualizations > AVS > AVS Troubleshooting

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump