MPlayer OpenGL output
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    GK_LKA
    Posts: 481 from 2004/3/28
    From: Hungary
    Ave!

    MPlayer supports OpenGL output on many platforms. It has some adventages in the face of our CGX output module:

    - the monitor aspect can be set (important on widescreen monitors)
    - widescreen movies be shown in fullscreen on 4:3 monitors too with panscan (the left and right sides are cutted off)
    - brightness/contrast adjusting is working
    - the OSD is put on the display after rescaling it to fill the screen -> much sharper OSD texts
    - subtitles are always in the black area below the film at full screen
    - etc

    Some screenshots

    Is it possible to port this output module to MorphOS? I think we have MiniGL, so I shouldn't be so hard. What do you think about this idea? Do we need this, or are you satisfied with the current output modules? (I am not...) Would OpenGL require too much resources or not?

    (PS: Why isn't playing of DiVX movies smooth even on my G4??)


    [ Edited by GK_LKA on 2006/9/23 22:06 ]
    [ GK / LKA Team ]
  • »23.09.06 - 13:21
    Profile Visit Website
  • Acolyte of the Butterfly
    Acolyte of the Butterfly
    Schlonz
    Posts: 131 from 2004/4/16
    From: Langen, Germany
    >(PS: Why isn't playing of DiVX movies smooth even on my G4??)

    For exactly this reason I still prefer MPlayer 0.91 for playing all videos except WMV9.
  • »23.09.06 - 14:24
    Profile
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    ThePlayer
    Posts: 1069 from 2003/3/24
    From: Hamburg/Germany
    This OpenGL output sounds great!
    Port it!
    PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5 running UWQHD Resolution
  • »23.09.06 - 17:01
    Profile
  • MorphOS Developer
    CISC
    Posts: 619 from 2005/8/27
    From: the land with ...
    Quote:

    MPlayer supports OpenGL output on many platforms. It has some adventages in the face of our CGX output module


    Sure, but none of those you listed has anything to do with the fact that it uses OpenGL though, they can just as easily be added to the overlay module (just requires some work .. you have the sources, get cracking! ;) )...

    Quote:

    Is it possible to port this output module to MorphOS? I think we have MiniGL, so I shouldn't be so hard.


    It's doable, but you probably require a newer TinyGL for all the features, additionally it requires a "little" rewriting to get rid of GLX stuff.

    Quote:

    Do we need this, or are you satisfied with the current output modules? (I am not...)


    For the reasons you listed you don't need this, you just need an updated overlay module, however there are plenty of other reasons for the GL module being Nice To Have(tm) (much more efficient OSD/subtitles, fragment programs for color-conversion (ie, more pixelformats done in HW), etc), however like I already mentioned it requires abit of work.

    Quote:

    Would OpenGL require too much resources or not?


    Certainly not, it's quite low overhead stuff it's doing there...


    - CISC
  • »23.09.06 - 17:16
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    GK_LKA
    Posts: 481 from 2004/3/28
    From: Hungary
    Quote:

    Sure, but none of those you listed has anything to do with the fact that it uses OpenGL though, they can just as easily be added to the overlay module (just requires some work .. you have the sources, get cracking! ;) )...


    I think high quality OSD display isn't possible in CGX mode, as you mentioned below.

    Quote:

    however there are plenty of other reasons for the GL module being Nice To Have(tm) (much more efficient OSD/subtitles, fragment programs for color-conversion (ie, more pixelformats done in HW), etc), however like I already mentioned it requires abit of work.


    Certainly not, it's quite low overhead stuff it's doing there...


    Hm, then I can't see any reason not to port it (except that I can't do it :D ).
    [ GK / LKA Team ]
  • »23.09.06 - 20:05
    Profile Visit Website
  • Acolyte of the Butterfly
    Acolyte of the Butterfly
    Schlonz
    Posts: 131 from 2004/4/16
    From: Langen, Germany
    >Hm, then I can't see any reason not to port it

    As CISC said, it would mean to invest some work, and this seems to be more than a few minutes - and our favourite MPlayer / Mencoder-porter, Fab, concentrates in doing Ambient stuff at the moment (which is indeed more important at the moment in my opinion).

    I personally would like so see MP3-encoding in Mencoder again, like it was implemented in V0.91, which is the main reason I still prefer not only MPlayer V0.91 but Mencoder V0.91, too ;-) Another reason why I still prefer Mencoder 0.91 is that V1.0pre8 produces AVI files that cannot be played by my stand alone DVD player, I only get Audio there, no video (like when I try to play the file produced by V1.0pre8 with MPlayer V0.91), although I use the same video encoding options that I use for Mencoder 0.91, and AVI files produced by V0.91 run fine both in my DVD player and with MPlayer 0.91. The problem could be that DIVX wants MP3 sound, and using MP2 sound instead could lead to kind of incompatible video files. I did not completely test this out.
  • »23.09.06 - 21:10
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    GK_LKA
    Posts: 481 from 2004/3/28
    From: Hungary
    Quote:

    As CISC said, it would mean to invest some work, and this seems to be more than a few minutes - and our favourite MPlayer / Mencoder-porter, Fab, concentrates in doing Ambient stuff at the moment (which is indeed more important at the moment in my opinion).


    Yes, I agree with you, Ambient is much important. I just wanted to show the people, that there is an OpenGL output module. Maybe somebody sometime will have time and motivation to port it :)

    About mencoder: yes, the lack of mp3 output is very bad. I think the problem is with the avi headers, not the mp3 audio track (audio is played on your player, as you said). I am now happy that finally this pre8 version doesn't ignore the video bitrate settings, as the previous 1.0preX versions did (was general MPlayer bug, not MOS-related). :)

    I have tried some other advanced options too, but I was not able to encode any mpeg4 video, which my DVD /divx player could play (it's of course not MPlayer's bug again I think...).
    [ GK / LKA Team ]
  • »23.09.06 - 21:39
    Profile Visit Website
  • MorphOS Developer
    CISC
    Posts: 619 from 2005/8/27
    From: the land with ...
    Quote:

    I think high quality OSD display isn't possible in CGX mode, as you mentioned below.


    It is. OSD scaling/alignment is separate from the output module...


    - CISC
  • »23.09.06 - 22:19
    Profile
  • Fab
  • MorphOS Developer
    Fab
    Posts: 1331 from 2003/6/16
    Schlonz,

    i'm not the favorite mplayer porter actually, i just updated main core, but i still prefer that Nico updates his own port. :)
  • »24.09.06 - 00:49
    Profile Visit Website
  • MorphOS Developer
    cyfm
    Posts: 537 from 2003/4/11
    From: Germany
    It's not just about porting an OpenGL module .... In fact the most important part required is actually missing in TinyGL and this is fragment shader support (required for color conversion/adjustment as well as deinterlacing). I don't see this happen anytime soon.
    Improving the overlay module sounds like a more reasonable solution.
  • »09.12.08 - 19:08
    Profile Visit Website
  • MorphOS Developer
    CISC
    Posts: 619 from 2005/8/27
    From: the land with ...
    Atleast subtitle quality/speed improvements can be done for MorphOS 2.x (Radeon only though), Fab has the code I wrote for that so he should be able to add that when/if he has time. ;)

    One major advantage to using OpenGL output though is that you're not limited to your gfx-card's overlay-capabilities (most cards do not support Full HD overlay-width)...


    - CISC
  • »10.12.08 - 11:34
    Profile
  • Fab
  • MorphOS Developer
    Fab
    Posts: 1331 from 2003/6/16
    I'd just mention that this thread is now 2 years old and a few things have changed since (better osd quality, on the fly aspect change, no "smoothness" issue, ...).
    But the gl module itself is still not doable for the reasons pega-1 gave.
  • »10.12.08 - 14:06
    Profile Visit Website
  • MorphOS Developer
    CISC
    Posts: 619 from 2005/8/27
    From: the land with ...
    Quote:

    I'd just mention that this thread is now 2 years old and a few things have changed since (better osd quality, on the fly aspect change, no "smoothness" issue, ...).


    Heh, yeah, wonder why pega-1 revived this thread. :P

    Anyway, does the "osd quality" bit mean you incorporated the new overlay-on-overlay code already?

    Quote:

    But the gl module itself is still not doable for the reasons pega-1 gave.


    Atleast not until kiero and bigfoot agree on something.. ;)


    - CISC
  • »11.12.08 - 13:24
    Profile
  • MorphOS Developer
    cyfm
    Posts: 537 from 2003/4/11
    From: Germany
    Right, didn't notice that it was a bit outdated ....
    Scary how quickly time passes by :D
  • »11.12.08 - 22:37
    Profile Visit Website
  • Fab
  • MorphOS Developer
    Fab
    Posts: 1331 from 2003/6/16
    @cisc

    Quote:


    Anyway, does the "osd quality" bit mean you incorporated the new overlay-on-overlay code already?



    I made it a bit less ugly than it was. But no, i didn't integrate your overlay on overlay code. I don't think i have your sources for that, or at least i didn't look at the right place.
  • »11.12.08 - 22:55
    Profile Visit Website