HAP support?

"Where is Feature X? I need Feature X! How can you not have Feature X?"
edwin
Team Resolume
Posts: 1136
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 10:40

Re: HAP support?

Post by edwin » Mon Oct 27, 2014 20:59

Hi Phlux,
I'm curious to what you mean with raw AVI api, you don't mean the good old VFW i hope?

Phlux
Met Resolume in a bar the other day
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 22:05

Re: HAP support?

Post by Phlux » Tue Oct 28, 2014 18:22

What I mean is HAPQ GPU playback is long overdue.

Asking your random customers development questions probably isn't the best use of your time. If an answer to that question would actually be useful, contact the dude I quoted there directly:
https://twitter.com/mrvux/status/526046600763043840

edwin
Team Resolume
Posts: 1136
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 10:40

Re: HAP support?

Post by edwin » Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:29

Hi Phlux,
I was aware of a DirectShow version of HAP, i made the false assumption that you were actually one of the developers (hadn't read your post thoroughly) and thus was interested in what you meant by raw AVI api.
For what's it worth we do take HAP seriously and that's why i initially responded to your post.

So if you could address me in a more friendly manner next time that would be nice.

Phlux
Met Resolume in a bar the other day
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 22:05

Re: HAP support?

Post by Phlux » Tue Nov 04, 2014 19:22

Claiming to have not "thoroughly" read a post that was already short and to the point, then implies a lack of care in your communication. Requesting that I communicate in a more friendly/caring fashion—while you can't be bothered to even read what you're replying to—is again distracting.

Joris
Doesn't Know Jack about VJ'ing or Software Development and Mostly Just Gets Coffee for Everyone
Posts: 5180
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 11:38

Re: HAP support?

Post by Joris » Fri Nov 07, 2014 11:24

Because you strike the tone that you do, my first impulse was to just ignore you. But I realise that you express two valid concerns ( although I must say you have a very aggressive way of expressing them ).

I'll try to be as clear as possible, but it's going to be long-winded, so bear with me.

We have already stated multiple times that support for Hap is coming.

When we do it, we want to do it right. The Hap team made a Mac/Quicktime centric implementation and left the rest to the open source community. This resulted in that there are now several .mov and .avi versions of Hap, none of which plays nice with both Mac and PC. Resolume is a cross-platform software, and when we say that we support HAP, we need to figure out how to deal with all these versions on both platforms.

All this is going to take time. Thus far, we've preferred to spend this time on other things, especially since Resolume users already have DXV as an option. As mentioned, we'll get round to Hap eventually, it's just not been a priority for us, nor has it been for the majority of our users.

Spending time and choosing priorities brings me to the other point you raise, which is the strange assumption that we would hold back Hap support until Res 5 in order to get more money. We'd be in the wrong business if we wanted to get rich. If you think that we all drive fancy cars and sit on our asses doing nothing while we take your cash, you're living in a strange fantasy world.

We work on Resolume full-time every day with the occasional help of freelancers. We do this so we can make new cool stuff, quickly respond to your questions, quickly fix bugs, keep the online shop running, make tutorials, test new hardware and basically do everything that it takes to make a good software. What you get as the installer is only the tip of the iceberg of the work that goes into it.

Every few years we release a new version that we ask money for. This is because this is our job, that we will also be doing next year, the year after that and the 10 years after that. When you support us by purchasing a license, you know that we will be here for you now and in the future. That is what you pay for. We're not some pop-up software that is going to disappear in a few years when we realise that we can make more money doing something else. We love VJ'ing and making software and we're committed to it.

On every major release, we offer a very cheap upgrade price. If you've been with us since Res 1, and bought every most expensive upgrade the day it came out, you can't have spent more than €800. That's a pretty good deal for 12 years of continuous software support and upgraded features.

Long story short, Hap is coming, maybe in Res 5, maybe earlier. We don't know yet. If you have any project that absolutely cannot happen without Hap playback in Resolume, you can always contact us directly and we'll see what we can do for you.

If you're concerned about future proofing your library, for instance because you want to render all your content to Hap, I'd be more worried if and how Hap survives the change to AVFoundation. Resolume will be here, with a lightning fast codec that plays on all platforms. Because we're committed to helping you get the best performance possible, now and in the future.

Thanks for reading all the way to the end of my rant. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them, but please ask them in a polite and constructive manner. We've treated you with nothing but respect, so we assume the same courtesy from your side.

Phlux
Met Resolume in a bar the other day
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 22:05

Re: HAP support?

Post by Phlux » Thu Dec 04, 2014 17:31

I have intended no general disrespect here, but can see how that may come across; not so much in what I’ve said, but perhaps in what I haven’t:
I think the Resolume team has done an amazing job creating Resolume, and I’m grateful that it exists in the way that it does. I have direct experience with other options and am still onboard with you guys, so this in itself is a testament. I think its easy to take technology for granted, and I’m guilty of that here. My apologies.

I can see how my tone may sound “aggressive”, but not in a way that’s violent or threatening; rather, in a forceful sense, and I can’t say I regret that. The subject is of high importance to me, and other approaches in the HAP threads haven’t produced the needed result, or seemingly even affected the Resolume priority list. HAP has become a sort of priority debate. Debate can be healthy. Conflict is part of life, and can be constructive, so I’ll address a few other points on the subject, this time coming also from a more authentic place that will ultimately include more gratitude and respect:

You said: “The Hap team made a Mac/Quicktime centric implementation and left the rest to the open source community… …Resolume is a cross-platform software, and when we say that we support HAP, we need to figure out how to deal with all these versions on both platforms.”
>> The Windows aspect of implementation seems a legit challenge, but how is it that Derivative here in Toronto was able to get HAP not only playing back on Windows; but also properly recording; and all the way back in September 2013?

You said: “…This resulted in that there are now several .mov and .avi versions of Hap, none of which plays nice with both Mac and PC”
>> Why can’t you use a version that works on Windows for the Windows version, and a version that works on Mac for the Mac version?

You said: “If you think that we all drive fancy cars and sit on our asses doing nothing while we take your cash, you're living in a strange fantasy world.”
>> I didn’t think this until reading it here, and haven’t said anything near that extreme in this thread! (Admit it, you’re just big pimpin’ ;)

You said: “…we're committed to helping you get the best performance possible, now and in the future.”
>> Sounds good. Is an important aspect of “performance now” not the resolution of the great functionality you’ve already developed? Can this not basically be equated to HAP functionality? Is the word NOW appropriate to describe something that still doesn’t exist over a year and a half after successful competitor development? Also, ought the name RESOLUME not be congruent with the word RESOLUTION?

The need for me is for good visual quality, at unusual aspect ratios, and higher resolutions—even if at the expense of some real-time processing; number or simultaneous layers; and/or frame rates above 24. I’m surprised this wouldn’t be a top priority development initiative considering how dirty DXV looks. The real-time functionality DXV enables is AMAZING, and I have mad respect for you pulling that off so far ahead of other developers back when you guys did, period. AWESOME, my hat off to you. AND, I’m now not gonna lie and say it looks good or agree that improving it shouldn’t be a top priority.

I don’t know enough about your development challenges to judge how much actual time and energy HAP implementation has taken for you, but I do know that making it available would certainly add value for me personally, and I would be happy to compensate you for a reasonably priced MAC HAPQ “plugin”. I would also be ok paying for the overall upgraded version—obviously including this—but within January. Beyond that time, I would personally need to go with another path of solutions. Will you make either of these happen? Pretty Please??

User avatar
drazkers
Wants to marry Resolume, and Resolume said "yes!"
Posts: 944
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 10:54
Location: Brady V up in Canada

Re: HAP support?

Post by drazkers » Thu Dec 04, 2014 23:31

Phlux wrote: >> The Windows aspect of implementation seems a legit challenge, but how is it that Derivative here in Toronto was able to get HAP not only playing back on Windows; but also properly recording; and all the way back in September 2013?
What happens when someone encodes HAP for mac and emails to house VJ's who use PC only and its the wrong version?

Also if you go back into the early versions of 077 tutorials you hear them mention the new open source GPU codec they are working on. It took a long time for that to come about and came about in a huge version improvement. 077 was around for awhile before 088 came out.


Phlux wrote: The need for me is for good visual quality, at unusual aspect ratios, and higher resolutions—even if at the expense of some real-time processing; number or simultaneous layers; and/or frame rates above 24. I’m surprised this wouldn’t be a top priority development initiative considering how dirty DXV looks. The real-time functionality DXV enables is AMAZING, and I have mad respect for you pulling that off so far ahead of other developers back when you guys did, period. AWESOME, my hat off to you. AND, I’m now not gonna lie and say it looks good or agree that improving it shouldn’t be a top priority.
The guys have been talking about the new DXV 3 that is coming and has similar quality settings to hap(reg and high quality). The next version of the codec will help with the visual quality for sure.

Phlux
Met Resolume in a bar the other day
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 22:05

Re: HAP support?

Post by Phlux » Fri Dec 05, 2014 00:18

drazkers wrote:What happens when someone encodes HAP for mac and emails to house VJ's who use PC only and its the wrong version?
The house VJ googles it, and finds out—for this current version—he needs to get them to send it to him in another format of his choice, that he can then encode to HAP-PC himself.
drazkers wrote:The guys have been talking about the new DXV 3 that is coming and has similar quality settings to hap(reg and high quality). The next version of the codec will help with the visual quality for sure.
When? Will it work with Syphon?

Joris
Doesn't Know Jack about VJ'ing or Software Development and Mostly Just Gets Coffee for Everyone
Posts: 5180
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 11:38

Re: HAP support?

Post by Joris » Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:57

Thanks for your well written and thought out response. I'm happy we can move the discussion forward like this.

To give you an idea of the current development status, Hap playback is not going to happen in January. If your project depends on Hap playback, I would advise you to use any of the excellent programs that already support it.

If you require higher quality GPU accelerated playback, we can't wait to hear what you think of DXV3, which *is* coming before January. Or of course, you could use ProRes, which is not GPU accelerated, but it's pretty darn fast and very high quality. The codec you use is unrelated to being able to work with Syphon. So, yes, DXV3 will work with Syphon, as will all other codecs.

The reasons we're holding off on HAP are many and complex, but partly they're what Drazkers mentions. We want to offer solutions that work. Incompatible codecs cause enough issues already. The moment someone has to Google onsite why clips aren't playing and then re-encode a codec that was supposed to be officially supported, we failed in our jobs as solution providers. Isn't one of the most promising benefits of Hap that you would never have to re-encode again?

And on that note, we're worried about the future of Quicktime. Hap is a Quicktime codec, and Apple has pretty much thrown all 3rd party codecs out the window with the arrival of AVFoundation. It's doubtful whether they will let anyone back in ( unless your last name is Sony or RedCam of course ), least of all an open source project that anyone can hack into. Certainly our community is smart enough to come up with all kinds of solutions, but for the moment, things aren't looking very rosy.

sleepytom
Hasn't felt like this about software in a long time
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 11:11
Location: sussex by the sea

Re: HAP support?

Post by sleepytom » Mon Dec 08, 2014 17:58

My personal perspective has shifted somewhat now with HAP.

I had missed the fact that HAP is implemented as an AVI codec as well as a QT and that the internal data structure for both filetypes differs. This has rather destroyed the purpose of the whole thing as a single codec which works across platforms.

DXV3 is awesome, and provides the needed quality improvement for Resolume. A lack of ability to play it in other software is a slight annoyance but seeing as we cannot play our clips in both VDMX and Touch even if they both use HAP then i'm pretty much over it as a concept. It was a nice idea but sadly the people who made it didn't really think about what they were doing with guiding the project into a useful state for people working on multiple platforms

So yes HAP would be nice in the future, but only if it settles down into a properly crossplatform solution (ie i can play HAP avi on OSX and HAP QT on PC and vis versa)

Post Reply