Patch looks different on my 2 machines, what's going on?
I'm having a confusing problem, I'm developing a big patch which i just tried out on another machine only to find it looks totally different.
The following patch demonstrates the problem. Changing the dim of the matrix causes all manner of glitchy feedback effects on my 2.66 core i7 running 10.6.6
but on my 2.6 core 2 duo running 10.5.8 I don't get any of the glitchy fun! SEE PICS.
Anyone know what is causing this? I'm using the same versions of max and Jitter.
here is the patch:
----------begin_max5_patcher---------- 839.3oc0Yt0bhBCEG+Y7SQFl91RYxE.g8oc+brSmNHDsokKNPbzc6zu6Kj.U sUjfXC1wKgDhj+me4bxMeclg4h7czRSvOA+AXX75LCCQQ0EXzj2vLMbWTRXo nZlYzs4Kd1zRdKNcGWTbT9lLNs.fAHHDfgv1ZrNjG8DKa0iEzHtrg7fPanE. QjIH25DLxFBdn4GsLOiWx9Gst9HR0skEmsIMeCOgxERwooTYQ7+tlJe7lrLt oEvr8Sc12exrXgbqLg6cLOn0xBSE+byeWvBSL22frr11ystr2lMq9KKUo0lz Ezh9YA1Sj3BuLTf6AEKByVcRFfwCDBnK.BozxxvUzO4yDyRA2gpdq.eBDId9 BOlfgxGTW74zPANPnfu.nvyWsJgdFKGKs74R6+8ueWvJZgc48i7tZ8ucLjPJ kWjCHv9sQjLwCeYd+cZ6c51ibzPOrBiTV4JeN7Pjc6HmFJ4OMCThH5XjxQSq VmoolV3oiV2WY1miP9RzHSHjqb3VmDANcQa+37DoMBqgHd5hHnoiH84i.mDe jfaVWDryj3h3Oc.YcXzK.n704.SyhRjI9nqLXNIUlOPp3bEWtZTBMrvBrnX0 BIar.KquF6519wBrNrpCslQhU1R.2gA24n.DcaB2BzwBb8zfu0yLt85srr37 s8a9Nnl02tOoi0414NcDSKeJik7UuN2ZKMIJF3.hdJrnV88r+2197fl8+5+o 01eTeNx1MvE4OeX7nRUOlFxKX6NlLQ4I4Ex5HhXg19APTfW8UvlqNLH9v8Eo g8JdFFKslAiYRywLPb9lfYzzh4sguPA+Z4xJ4UkTMTmcfBPVtMUDd92DH6Le DTV7.MSXYe7nyD.pt7iQeY9lhnVios0A60ULsjyxB4r7rCpD4n57DKNlJtc6 L.or304Uy1znAvCmzOPUIgTPQeP1e0RBqfjP5UQvaNIUeTF82wMLIggA1t0Q yhSl06fbiTrpnULVq7SkHQOspn.ETjdCD8UTQH840CUTRX8IIjhRhnOIoxHn A5c3JUjjudkDQkA0Q2fZBd6MSCBeCpIxkM8mbiCD79biUsdpnVmaOBhGC.Q9 dG928JyINJ5QJcuquxG65CUYzM7XBaqx71r+CHnsyLA -----------end_max5_patcher-----------
no glitch here, 2.5 core 2 duo running 10.5.8 …
maybe you are enjoying a snow leopard specific bug :-)
Ooh hello, all sorts of glitchy crap on my 10.6.6 MBP (2.66 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo)
On 10.6.6 I get the same glitches. Hanging in jit.pwindows after the jit.lcd and jit.matrix objects, they’re doing just fine. So it seems to be some issue with the jit.wake.
The issue remains even when you slow down the main metro. And the CPU load isn’t particularly high even when the metro is 4 times as fast. So apparently not a processor load issue. In Activity Monitor both processors show close to equal usage, which hints that the actual Jitter processing is split over both processors. As I recall, one of the features of Snow Leopard was more splitting of CPU-intensive tasks over the multiple cores. So it might be some kind of thread synchronization issue within jit.wake that is handled differently on Leopard and Snow Leopard.
But that is conjecture. Someone who has worked on the code could certainly say more.
FTR: results here were with OS 10.6.6 on an iMac w/3.06GHz Intel Core Duo & 4GB phys. RAM.
left is 10.6.6 on macbook pro. right is 10.5.8 on macbook. weird.
cool little patch (on 10.6)!
Amazing find! Very nice. I modded your patch a bit, it's going mental in colour too :)
WinXp, intell-Q6600, 2Gb, NVidia 8800 GS
----------begin_max5_patcher---------- 932.3oc2Zt0aZCCEG+YpT+NXE02FE4icRHYOs84XZZJjXntMWPAifsp8ce9R BEsZ.SKIgVAnC9RR96e43SrOvy2dyHuYUaYq7PeE8CznQOKqYjtNUMiZqXjW Qx1z7jU5N5UvVsJYAyabSiB1VgtA11kU0BdgrQzFNqNCPOtjsXWG4Y5tUM6w 6g3c0VttfWlyD5SNos14UkhU7+vTUBvjf3.HZ5dGR0ZQ6w.sUuLQj9.ubwup YoByXhFhmfGinQwJCPmpMQSvne1dTlyj32KYlCwy6k1TpnLoP2h22q4I4d5V 96s2nrRyXmwVIaibj+Zp8HWLoHQTy2h7QoOjTiHXr5iMtEXGava.ajifMBQi MeHvfMekQU2Qvlbb7Ky3va7ofXaSoU4U0liGTWB7jnXLDGp9Ft4af5pdwodZ 05RASxZDI3Pv12NrCrBapT+V4r+Q3bHFa.rwfizbFNJm4kBMfa9nJ1QNrqKl wpsAFB4bbCOHYHmlLDy72.r6fYVR4hNhHGLxWFu.cGHeakV3yIV2AoE3.sh0 lPsaDDODQ4DUKVjyrFxO7DNMtObIlg6TbaXoSFbxLK4hGEofIpqPTqQO.+N+ 1dCG.iIj3vjjNb1woC0BXoWocXQ67XsTiiB3eUFq88vNRmytVGsOTr6doPsx qtOdLIx.JigRcDW8Ke9xg3Cz47octXCeBuJ4yg7eh6s35eHceh5d73+Av6YY R5SHr4kMLM0Nl7ufXpYkQFSD3.l560MmlyRpGilUuXlbeXAJVMFMWURwMYMi QKSj26TCJ8Bron6Hn67sAzvt2uqAnlciPI9C2xrUIMX4FdYV0FarfdVK01kL APMOxuYeF3iuZ6lD.zIoJIOMyg7jP507jzruK.h9zkmjyJ6TPuRcZSVS9Dlc JE02j7DC8s4ykWBoQFQbRr0jTMsegtYS2.Y5UFzMmbubd4qxmsdznZ3+tUrp ZccZqVa7eQ6MdxXqD7xDAupbuNo.9985AdVFS2gcORofmsrR9XqFgbLGDm0F wEsACizvWuZapKRKbPjVrKRaXb1hbUZPuKM.6p1H8u1.W0Fs+0lSAPhGD2M2 zVzvnMpSA2fqYwgGFw46j3HWyhidthifimDr6WziRdozkQ1gNIa+qXlRdeHE hB2+mL0TRmu0KxXHrSFBWlkY4TTRx07jc+258dh9OhP3dktHp1MG1g41suSK cMXPzVfKRiNLNhwcB1ngZWOe.qLDxKkrrSzauQZ9GvCtqLC -----------end_max5_patcher-----------
Thanks for the report, we’ll have a look.
Thanks for the report. I can confirm and have this fixed for the next version. For now, you’ll have to use some annoying hacks to send a matrix with the fb set to zero and then change back to whatever you want it to when you resize. The feedback matrix wasn’t clearing when resized. Sorry for the hassle.
Nice avatar, Dave!
Josh, but i really love that effect! Is it possible to specify it? Plus my next version of Forester relies on it for what i’m calling "Bad video" mode!
it kicks in at about 1:05
Exactly! Keep it alive!
Sorry for the ‘me too’ post, but I also liked the Snow Leopard version better;-)
Um, maybe we could have a general message to jit.matrix which grabs uninitialized memory. Or maybe someone’s already made a 3rd party extern. Could also simulate some of the effects with jit.scanwrap and jit.coerce.
and once more, the community invented a new style.
use while its fresh, when it goes commercial, it will no longer be cool.
Forums > Jitter