- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 09:58:04 -0700
On Sep 10, 2010, at 7:53 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer > <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Biju <bijumaillist at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=571822 >>>> Firefox fires the timeupdate event once per frame. >>>> Safari 5 and Chrome 6 fire every 250ms. Opera 10.50 fires every 200ms. >>> >>> >>> Now in firefox bug 571822 they are changing Firefox fires the >>> timeupdate event at every 250ms >>> >>> But this takes away control of somebody who want to do some image >>> process on every frame, as well as miss frames. >>> >>> So can we have a "newFrame" event and/or a "minTimeupdate" property to >>> say what should be the minimum time interval between consecutive >>> timeupdate event. >> >> If we have a newFrame event, might it be an idea to actually hand over the >> frame data (audio + video) in the event? I would think that only ppl that >> want to do manipulations on the media data want to have that kind of >> resolution and it might be more efficient to just provide the data with the >> event? > > That would actually be a rather useful property. I have several > examples of video/canvas integration that I show off regularly at > talks (and will have an article about on html5doctors.com soon), where > I just listen to the play event and start running a function every > 20ms, stopping when I see that the video is stopped or paused. Just > being able to register the function with a newFrame event instead > would be useful in terms of avoiding unnecessary computation, and > getting the data directly rather than having to draw the video into a > backing canvas and then ask for its ImageData would shave some of the > complexity off of the code. The problem with a 'newFrame' callback is what to do if the callback takes longer than the duration of a single frame. Does the video engine start dropping frames, or does the video lag? In WebKit on Mac, video playback is hardware-accelerated, and the presentation of video frames is disconnected from the web page drawing machinery. A newFrame callback would force us to drop back into software rendering, which is significantly more CPU intensive. I don't support the general use of a 'newFrame' callback except in the context of video processing via canvas. Simon
Received on Friday, 10 September 2010 09:58:04 UTC