Port FreeFrame plugins

franz's picture

Personnaly, i would'nt vote for this one, as: 1 Freeframe is a pretty old standard 2 there aren't many freeframe plugs compiled for OS X

which one are you interested in ?

smokris's picture
CPU vs. GPU... but Leopard

I'm interested in freeframe because freeframe plugins (if i understand correctly) operate on the CPU, not the GPU. Using only CoreImage patches, which operate on the GPU, it's easy to construct a patch with a really slow framerate that is hardly using any CPU. So I'm thinking having some (redundant) functionality available through FreeFrame would be useful, so that we have the option to use more CPU when desired.

However... I just noticed that this feature already exists (!) in the Leopard version of Quartz Composer. So I think we should hold off.