On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Kevin Brosius wrote: > Cool idea. Is there a problem with shape wipe that prevented you from > using a new shape wipe mask for vertical wipes?
The main issue with shape wipe is simply that it's less convenient - I was in fact using it before I made these changes, but that meant having to create a gradient image, and do more configuration for each use of the transition. The gradient image is quantized to 256 grey levels (so a very slow wipe can't be as smooth) and might have to be made in a different version for each resolution (I'm not sure if shape wipe does automatic scaling of the control image). I'd expect this patch to be a fair bit more CPU-efficient than shape wipe because it's doing a much simpler operation. It's probably faster than the old version of wipe too, because of the use of memcpy. >From a usability perspective, a newbie who sees "wipe" in the list of transitions is going to expect "vertical" to be one of the things it does, and telling them "Oh, you can simulate it by creating a vertical gradient and..." is not really an acceptable answer. -- Matthew Skala [EMAIL PROTECTED] Embrace and defend. http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/ _______________________________________________ Cinelerra mailing list [email protected] https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
