what is the shortest way for video to the GPU?

Aug 16, 2007 at 9:27pm

what is the shortest way for video to the GPU?

hi all,

is there any other possibility to bring video to a jit.gl.videoplane than to connect a jit.qt.movie? all the data goes through the CPU, right? I have performance problems because of that. If I play my footage with standalone players on the desktop everything works fine but not so in jitter. Moreover jitter uses only one thread. Half of my CPU is bored beyond belief while the other one goes to it’s limit. It’s a Core Duo 3GHz 8650 (It shows 50% on both cores which means that only one core at a time is being used). If I use two standalone executables it probably won’t help much because I want to combine two video streams (1365×768 pjpg75% each) in one window.
Does anyone have an idea what to do?

thanks
secco

#33295
Aug 16, 2007 at 9:49pm

try this:

jit.qt.movie 720 480 @colormode uyvy
|
|
jit.gl.videoplane [contextname] @colormode uyvy

i’ve seen two DV/NTSC and 1 live DV feed mixed together this way at
23fps with a 1Ghz 17″ g4 powerbook. that’s fast.

On Aug 16, 2007, at 5:27 PM, secco wrote:

>
> hi all,
>
> is there any other possibility to bring video to a
> jit.gl.videoplane than to connect a jit.qt.movie? all the data goes
> through the CPU, right? I have performance problems because of
> that. If I play my footage with standalone players on the desktop
> everything works fine but not so in jitter. Moreover jitter uses
> only one thread. Half of my CPU is bored beyond belief while the
> other one goes to it’s limit. It’s a Core Duo 3GHz 8650 (It shows
> 50% on both cores which means that only one core at a time is being
> used). If I use two standalone executables it probably won’t help
> much because I want to combine two video streams (1365×768 pjpg75%
> each) in one window.
> Does anyone have an idea what to do?
>
> thanks
> secco
>

#110745
Aug 16, 2007 at 10:08pm

note that on windows XP you need to use the cc.yuvy2rgba.jxs shader,
as there are some issues with YUV support on windows XP last I heard.

On Aug 16, 2007, at 5:49 PM, joshua goldberg wrote:

> try this:
>
> jit.qt.movie 720 480 @colormode uyvy
> |
> |
> jit.gl.videoplane [contextname] @colormode uyvy
>
> i’ve seen two DV/NTSC and 1 live DV feed mixed together this way at
> 23fps with a 1Ghz 17″ g4 powerbook. that’s fast.
>
> On Aug 16, 2007, at 5:27 PM, secco wrote:
>
>>
>> hi all,
>>
>> is there any other possibility to bring video to a
>> jit.gl.videoplane than to connect a jit.qt.movie? all the data
>> goes through the CPU, right? I have performance problems because
>> of that. If I play my footage with standalone players on the
>> desktop everything works fine but not so in jitter. Moreover
>> jitter uses only one thread. Half of my CPU is bored beyond belief
>> while the other one goes to it’s limit. It’s a Core Duo 3GHz 8650
>> (It shows 50% on both cores which means that only one core at a
>> time is being used). If I use two standalone executables it
>> probably won’t help much because I want to combine two video
>> streams (1365×768 pjpg75% each) in one window.
>> Does anyone have an idea what to do?
>>
>> thanks
>> secco
>>
>

v a d e //

http://www.vade.info
abstrakt.vade.info

#110746
Aug 17, 2007 at 1:45am

It is my understanding that the colormode uyvy is only an advantage
when using DV format videos. But I have often read the most optimized
compression for jitter is photo JPEG. I assume in this case one would
use the default colormode when working with videoplanes (&/or slabs).
MCan anyone elaborate on this?
Also….
My project is using various sized videos. None are 720×480. However,
some are 640×480. If my assumption above is correct, do you think it
be faster to composite videos using DV format 720 480 @colormode
uyvy, or if I used Photo JPEG 640 480 @ with the default colormode?
Thanks-
MarkDavid

On Aug 16, 2007, at 3:08 PM, vade wrote:

> note that on windows XP you need to use the cc.yuvy2rgba.jxs
> shader, as there are some issues with YUV support on windows XP
> last I heard.
>
> On Aug 16, 2007, at 5:49 PM, joshua goldberg wrote:
>
>> try this:
>>
>> jit.qt.movie 720 480 @colormode uyvy
>> |
>> |
>> jit.gl.videoplane [contextname] @colormode uyvy
>>
>> i’ve seen two DV/NTSC and 1 live DV feed mixed together this way
>> at 23fps with a 1Ghz 17″ g4 powerbook. that’s fast.
>>
>> On Aug 16, 2007, at 5:27 PM, secco wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> is there any other possibility to bring video to a
>>> jit.gl.videoplane than to connect a jit.qt.movie? all the data
>>> goes through the CPU, right? I have performance problems because
>>> of that. If I play my footage with standalone players on the
>>> desktop everything works fine but not so in jitter. Moreover
>>> jitter uses only one thread. Half of my CPU is bored beyond
>>> belief while the other one goes to it’s limit. It’s a Core Duo
>>> 3GHz 8650 (It shows 50% on both cores which means that only one
>>> core at a time is being used). If I use two standalone
>>> executables it probably won’t help much because I want to combine
>>> two video streams (1365×768 pjpg75% each) in one window.
>>> Does anyone have an idea what to do?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> secco
>>>
>>
>
> v a d e //
>
> http://www.vade.info
> abstrakt.vade.info
>
>
>

#110747
Aug 17, 2007 at 2:00am

uyvy uses half chroma sampled pixels, so regardless of what the
native format is for the video (RGB or YUV), a YUV (sometimes called
4:2:2) pipeline will be more efficient because, quite literally there
is less data going to the GPU.

put a jit.fpsgui in dim mode under a jit.qt.movie and do some
experiments.

On Aug 16, 2007, at 9:45 PM, MarkDavid Hosale wrote:

> It is my understanding that the colormode uyvy is only an advantage
> when using DV format videos. But I have often read the most
> optimized compression for jitter is photo JPEG. I assume in this
> case one would use the default colormode when working with
> videoplanes (&/or slabs). MCan anyone elaborate on this?
> Also….
> My project is using various sized videos. None are 720×480.
> However, some are 640×480. If my assumption above is correct, do
> you think it be faster to composite videos using DV format 720 480
> @colormode uyvy, or if I used Photo JPEG 640 480 @ with the default
> colormode?
> Thanks-
> MarkDavid
>
>
> On Aug 16, 2007, at 3:08 PM, vade wrote:
>
>> note that on windows XP you need to use the cc.yuvy2rgba.jxs
>> shader, as there are some issues with YUV support on windows XP
>> last I heard.
>>
>> On Aug 16, 2007, at 5:49 PM, joshua goldberg wrote:
>>
>>> try this:
>>>
>>> jit.qt.movie 720 480 @colormode uyvy
>>> |
>>> |
>>> jit.gl.videoplane [contextname] @colormode uyvy
>>>
>>> i’ve seen two DV/NTSC and 1 live DV feed mixed together this way
>>> at 23fps with a 1Ghz 17″ g4 powerbook. that’s fast.
>>>
>>> On Aug 16, 2007, at 5:27 PM, secco wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> hi all,
>>>>
>>>> is there any other possibility to bring video to a
>>>> jit.gl.videoplane than to connect a jit.qt.movie? all the data
>>>> goes through the CPU, right? I have performance problems because
>>>> of that. If I play my footage with standalone players on the
>>>> desktop everything works fine but not so in jitter. Moreover
>>>> jitter uses only one thread. Half of my CPU is bored beyond
>>>> belief while the other one goes to it’s limit. It’s a Core Duo
>>>> 3GHz 8650 (It shows 50% on both cores which means that only one
>>>> core at a time is being used). If I use two standalone
>>>> executables it probably won’t help much because I want to
>>>> combine two video streams (1365×768 pjpg75% each) in one window.
>>>> Does anyone have an idea what to do?
>>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>> secco
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> v a d e //
>>
>> http://www.vade.info
>> abstrakt.vade.info
>>
>>
>>
>

v a d e //

http://www.vade.info
abstrakt.vade.info

#110748
Aug 17, 2007 at 1:26pm

thanks guys,

but my problem is not the GPU but the CPU.
Even when the jit.qt.movie is completely disconnected from the videoplane or any other output the CPU load gets so high. So it doesn’t make a difference if I use argb or uyvy. I tried it.
Moreover i need an alpha layer.
But did someone ever try TGA instead of JPG? I get very interesting results with it! Seems like jpg still needs more CPU to decode than TGA.
The thing that hurts most now is the single threading. How can I use the CPU more efficiently on both cores? two instances? What’s the fastest way to let two instances of jitter communicate? maxhole? netsend?

secco

#110749
Aug 17, 2007 at 4:17pm

best udage i got of a video codec was with apples animation codec. working
on xp.
uncompressed~ codecs (like tga and animation) should be easier on the CPU
and taxing on disk throughput

On 8/17/07, secco wrote:
>
>
> thanks guys,
>
> but my problem is not the GPU but the CPU.
> Even when the jit.qt.movie is completely disconnected from the videoplane
> or any other output the CPU load gets so high. So it doesn’t make a
> difference if I use argb or uyvy. I tried it.
> Moreover i need an alpha layer.
> But did someone ever try TGA instead of JPG? I get very interesting
> results with it! Seems like jpg still needs more CPU to decode than TGA.
> The thing that hurts most now is the single threading. How can I use the
> CPU more efficiently on both cores? two instances? What’s the fastest way to
> let two instances of jitter communicate? maxhole? netsend?
>
> secco
>
>

#110750
Aug 17, 2007 at 4:25pm

Even with jit.qt.movie not hooked up, it’s still playing the movie
internally. You have to say “stop” to stop this.

wes

#110751
Aug 17, 2007 at 8:45pm

I know wes, I just wanted to show that UYVY or ARGB wouldn’t make a difference at that stage.

secco

#110752

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.