iR genlock problems

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Peter A. Tinker (ptinker++at++netcom.com)
Tue, 3 Dec 1996 20:37:37 -0800


I recently reported here that I was having problems genlocking a
three-pipe iR: pfFrame reports that pipes are not genlocked. Many
thanks to those who replied! Here's what I've found.

* 8-CPU (R4400) Onyx
* 3 iR Pipes
* IRIX 6.2 + patch 1355
* Performer 2.+, OpenGL

1. Use the H/C Sync as the genlock signal; daisy-chain this through
the genlock in and genlock out of the other pipes. Terminate the
genlock out of the last pipe.
2. With ircombine, set the sync source of pipe 0 to INTERNAL; set
sync source of pipes 1 and 2 to EXTERNAL.
3. With ircombine, specify the sync format as the vfo corresponding
to the cmb (more on this later).
4. Use gfxinfo -v to examine the sync specifications and genlock
status. Ignore the fact that gfxinfo reports all sync as INTERNAL.
f
IF each pipe is set up identically with 1280x1024_60 or 2++at++1280x1024_60
and uses 1280x1024_60.vfo as the sync format, running

perfly -c 3

pfFrame does not complain of genlock problems. BUT if one is different,
e.g. 8++at++640x480_60 as in our case, then

perfly -c 2 -C 0,1 reports no genlock problem
perfly -c 2 -C 1,2 reports no genlock problem
perfly -c 2 -C 0,2 reports no genlock problem

BUT

perfly -c 3 reports genlock missing between pipes 0 and 2, using any
of

-C 0,1,2
-C 0,2,1

or without the -C option.

What's going on, and is there any way of stopping it? Can I only
genlock pipes that are configured identically? That would really be a
drag. Am I specifying an incorrect vfo? What vfo should I use for
the 8++at++640x480_60 pipe? Has anyone successfully genlocked pipes running very different
configurations? Is this a Performer bug?

Pete Tinker
Hughes Research Labs
=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/Technology/Performer/
            Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
        Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com


New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:54:05 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.