YOUR ACCOUNT

Login or Register to post new topics or replies
Kraellin
Kraellin

Posts: 12749
Filters: 99
the current extraction type components all work the same way, they have source, channel and invert inputs, but only one output. you can change which channel gets outputted with the internal property or by using a control. but, that requires using 3 extraction components if you want all the channels back in your assemble component.

i would like to see an additonal extraction component that has 3 outputs, one for each channel. the outputs would be fixed based on the channels themselves. so, in an RGB extraction you would have inputs of source, channel and invert as before, but on the output side you would have 3 outputs, R, G and B. in fact, you probably wouldnt even need the 'channel' part on the input in this one.

plese note, i like the current extraction components, so this one i'm suggesting would be an ADDITIONAL one, not a replacement. both would have a use. the current works fine but tends to add clutter to the edit workspace, especially in large, complex filters. and if you want to use controls to control the channels in the current type, that is taking 3 precious controls out the current possible 10 we can use.

craig
If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!

Craig
  Details E-Mail
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator
Posts: 3446
Filters: 55
Quote
Kraellin wrote:
extraction component that has 3 outputs


Oh yes, multi-output components smile:D The programmers will kill me smile:D
  Details E-Mail
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator
Posts: 3446
Filters: 55
Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote:
i like the current extraction components


Well, I disagree -- they're not too convenient. What annoys me most is that when I need to process only one channel of the image, I have to build all this 3xExtract/3xAssemble thing. Yes it does the job, but it can be done better.

I hope I will have a chance to revisit the Channel components, but currently we just don't have time.
  Details E-Mail
Kraellin
Kraellin

Posts: 12749
Filters: 99
vladimir,

when i was saying i like the current extraction components, i was just trying to see them NOT eliminated. i do like being able to switch to just one channel and have that applied. sometimes that's what you want. that's also why i capitalized ADDITIONAL each time i used that word. i just wanted to make sure the current extractions werent replaced by the other.

there are more swtiching type changes or addtions i'd like to see, but i'll do those in separate threads.

and i do appreciate the time constraints. all my requests for new features come with the idea that they arent going to make the first release. that's just a given. so, no worries there. i have beta tested before and i know that once you're in beta the idea is to get it out the door with as few bugs as possible and get some income coming in. the problem here is, you havent got a lot of bugs smile;)

craig
If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!

Craig
  Details E-Mail
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator
Posts: 3446
Filters: 55
Quote
Kraellin wrote:
the problem here is, you havent got a lot of bugs


Yep -- and we've already fixed more than half of bugs we've got from this beta. But the submission/approval process remains problematic -- both on the technical side and on the editorial side.
  Details E-Mail

Join Our Community!

Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!

33,711 Registered Users
+18 new in 30 days!

153,531 Posts
+36 new in 30 days!

15,347 Topics
+72 new in year!

Create an Account

Online Users Last minute:

20 unregistered users.