Forum

Resolution confusion

vvvv beta question
#1

Hi there, I’m a beginner to vvvv, I’ve been reading all the tutorials, and looking around here but seem to have run into a confusing problem.

I have a number of videos collected together in a grid, they are each 256 by 256. My output resolution from my renderer is 1920 by 1080, so I used a Scale x of 0.5625 on the View Transform pin of the Renderer. This makes sure it’s square and the right aspect.

My confusion comes from the Transform node going into the Quad node.
It seems it only works as I think it should when I have the Scale x and Y pin of the transform node both set to 0.5.
But surely it should work set at scale 1? But when I set it at this, each video is displayed way too big on screen which seems bigger than 256 by 256 pixels. I’m confused?

Many thanks in advance.

Test.v4p (10.2 kB)

#2

You should scale transform your quads, not your renderer.

So delete the Scale node on your renderer.

Learn your spreads and use the cross node. The table you made is the same as a linear spread, width = 2, spread count = 4.

The scale of your quad would be: 2/4 = 0.5
2 = the scale you need to make 1 quad fill the entire renderer.
4 = the ammount off quads you want in your grid.
0.5 = the x-scale and y-scale for 16 quads in a grid.

The screen resolution has not much to do with this.

Good luck :)

#3

Hi West, thanks for the help!

So forgive me if I’m not grasping this, I rebuilt it, so I’m right having the scale being 0.5 for x and y on the Transform Node that plugs into the Quad?

If I delete the Scale node on my renderer when I full screen all my videos are stretched in x and aren’t square?

Test.v4p (8.2 kB)

#4

Don’t have VLC player addon installed, that is why I didn’t post a patch for you.

Ahh… you want to keep it square… missed that part… but than 1920 seems a bit tooo much.

Test_3.v4p (11.3 kB)

#5

Hello again, hey great thanks very much!

Quick question you put my screen resolution in your patch as 1920 by 1096, is this intentionally not the actual size of 1920 by 1080 or are you just testing me ? :)

I tried your method in my patch but it squeezes everything, is this because your Renderer EX9 is set at in x 1024 by 768? and mine is 1920 by 1080

He he, I can see I’m wasting screen space but I don’t know what else to do!
I want to project this at the end onto a wall, I made each video square at 256 by 256 because I read that this was an efficient texture size, and in doing this it means my end result is square. I mean I could add more videos to fill the entire space but I worry that playing back that many will grind things to a halt

#6

Hi dedvendies

I felt like doing a version with aspect ratio that will adjust dynamically to the resolution of your video and screen.

-sunep

Test_4SquareVideoGrid.v4p (21.4 kB)

#7

The 1096 was a typo ;). You can always use herr inspector to change screen resolution off the renderer.

Think it is good to make the clips small, dunno how it would run, perhaps some RAID 0 (striped) ssd’s can speed things up.
If your clips are short, you might try to queue them as still images.

Yes, was thinking about this, and perhaps making everything fullscreen, and than in the end use scaling might keep everything a bit easier, specialy if you want to show more/other stuff.

#8

Hey guys, thanks very much for your help, really useful!

West, my clips would be 25fps, 256 by 256 and 3 seconds each, do you think that would make more sense having them as image sequences rather than video?

#9

Hi,
You could try the preloader node and use the 75 textures of every clip :P , it´s a good way to make fast scratch with video, if not you can just play the videos with the VLC plugin or FileStream, but this last one is not spreadable.

Look at this

© vvvv group