On Thursday 21 March 2002 05:36 am, Alan Cox wrote: > > You are happy with those devices being of inferior > > quality on Linux? The quality of the image coming off a camera or > > scanner is > > If the quality is inferior then you got the code wrong Which code? The driver code? If I can't post process the image in the driver then what comes out of the driver will be of inferior quality. > > How is it done now? The reccomendation I saw was "we could just let xv > > do it". How many apps are perfectly happy to let xv manipulate their > > images for display? > > For many applications its ideal. Its efficient too. So if we had a library, for many applications it would be ideal. > Rotation is hard unless you happen to have square pixels at both source > and destination. It only _seems_ easy. Wouldn't have it any other way. Since no v4l application supports anything but, I see no problem. > > If we would want the application to have the option of saying "give me an > > unfiltered video stream", I have no problem with that. Then they could > > use their own gamma, rescaling, contrast, whatever. But I'm going to bet > > that few applications are going to make use of it. I base this on the > > fact that the apps available now could do this and generally don't. > > Actually they all pretty much do. They open the kernel interface and use it > rather than going via a preprocessing library. Once you have a good library > most people would use it I just opened xawtv and started viewing a stream coming off my camera. I didn't like the gamma or sharpness of the image. What's the xawtv control to fix those? I did the same with gqcam but it didn't have those controls either. CamStream has a field call "gamma", but it is mapped to the v4l "whiteness" parameter and isn't a post-processing effect. Are we talking about the same thing here? I am not seeing many v4l apps that do this sort of post processing.
