Excuse me if this is a noob question, but I noticed in all of the TextureFX patches I looked in, if there is an internal renderer, the height and width are defaulting to 256x256. Although the output texture size is being set to match the input texture size, since the backbuffer of the renderer(s) are not being set also, does that not mean the effect is always being rendered at an effective 256x256 and THEN scaled to the matching size? Shouldn’t the renderers have their backbuffer set the same as the output DX9texture? Thanks!
Very basic explanation but I think if the renderer is docked and is set to 0x0 the DX9Texture is then able to define the output resolution and it’s not being upscaled.
Also Renderer (EX9) is set to 256x256 by default.
Thanks Lightmare, I thought that might be the case, but I got suspicious because the “Actual Backbuffer” width and height are reported by Herr Inspektor as 256x256 although the downstream DX9Texture is set to 1920x1080. Also, before I posted this I did a search and found https://discourse.vvvv.org/t/6535 by joreg which seems to suggest otherwise, but it’s not totally clear.
I just did a test (when the going gets tough, the tough get empirical) and it does in fact seem it works as you suggest - I see a full res texture even though the renderer is reporting 256x256.
Interesting, I just did another test with the Renderer (EX9) feeding two DX9Texture nodes with different settings, and they each got renders at their res settings. And not only that, even when I set explicit backbuffer sizes in the renderer, the DX9Textures still produce textures at their specified res. So it looks like the renderer node is being duplicated for each connected DX9Texture. When I set the Renderer (EX9) to some low res like 16x16, it shows a chunky image in its window, but a high-res texture from it looks great. Not what I expected!
BackbufferTest.v4p (9.1 kB)