Anyone interested in writing visualJockey plugins?

[elbows]

They finally released the SDK for visualJockey 3.2 (latest release).

So I was wondering if any C++ programmers lurked around these parts, who want to program cool VJ stuff without having to worry about the engine, interface etc etc?

Im going to have a go, which should be amusing as I have no idea what Im doing in C++ :D

I think they are planning to add more documentation & sampels to the SDK at some point, not sure.

http://www.visualjockey.com/software/download/vjo3-sdk-[3.20].zip (must have visualJockey R3.2 to use this)

Programming forum for the above:

http://www.dvmachine.com/vj/viewforum.php?f=4

[many2]

There are both samples and a wizard to create effects templates (number of input, etc.) available now with the SDK. With the SDK you can create your own plugins or even your own drivers that seamlessly fit into visualJockey's architecture. The SDK is available for both free and commercial projects, which means you can actually sell/distribute your plugins the way you want once you've made them. If you know your C++ and hopefully some assembler and are familiar with MFC then you definitely should give the vJo R3.2 SDK a try.

Many-2

[eXhale]

I guess this only work with VisualC++?

I have it, but I'm just asking :D

[elbows]

Yep Visual C++

Pete Warden released a plugin he wrote and has also released the source code, which should really help. I dont know of anyone else whose coding at the moment.

Its a shame so many programmers repeating everyone elses work by building whole software from scratch, I was kinda hoping more peeps would be interested in getting straight on with coding great effects etc within an existing architecture. But I can well understand why people dont, I guess money to buy visualJockey and perhaps a dislike of its way of doing things plays a big part.

Curses I wish I had learnt C++ when I had a chance, I coulda spent a couple of weeks coding some nice little effects then flogged em real cheap at $20 or $30 or something. Oh well, not got any time to learn these days, so Im just dreaming ;)

[sleepytom]

all good n well but the sdk link don't work :(

[sleepytom]

it should be http://www.visualjockey.com/software/download/vjo3-sdk-[R3.2].zip

[pdoom]

Pete Warden released a plugin he wrote and has also released the source code, which should really help. I dont know of anyone else whose coding at the moment.

hey elbows, remember me? You're really sure I'm not coding at the moment? ;)

[MoRpH]

Originally posted by elbows
But I can well understand why people dont, I guess money to buy visualJockey and perhaps a dislike of its way of doing things plays a big part.

Yep I would definately agree that it has a lot to do with it from some programmers I have talked with.

[isobrown]

by chance, and even with a few programmers interessted....we users of vjo have 115 ressource loaders & plugins available.

This is enough to build serious work, isn't it?

[infopocalypse]

In my mind, there are several different reason to build software from scratch:

1. Lack of capabilities.

Having now seriously looked @ about every soft out there, I think it's a fair bet that even the most flexible software architecture will not have something for everybody, to quote overplayed Baz Lurhman songs. i.e. running into this with GLAM, which I wrote to use with logos because I found that text animation and dynamic text was poorly done.

2. Massive inefficiencies.

It seems that software as a general rule, not just VJ software, are just riddled with inefficiencies.... which was not how it was years ago. Years ago, before RAD, you had to write for the cheapest machine, and nowadays most people use hardware acceleration... which excludes the cheaper machine, and if there ever was a market truth to be told is it this: "THERE'S MORE CHEAP SHIT THAN EXPENSIVE SHIT". VJ softs tend to be written either high-level, in Director or, worse, using interpreted psuedolanguages a la Winamp's AVS or Mocha. The ones out there tend to use hardwarisms as a crutch, thus throwing out a lot of the idea of program design.

3. Inflexible expandability.

Existing soft's may not have easy expandability save an upgrade to the next version.

4. Too flexible expandability.

A soft may ONLY call DLLs, thus making it have massive overhead from external calls... and then there's the middle ground.

5. Unstable expandability.

Open architecture using something less standardized, like Namespace Differentiation.

6. Concentrated design.

This one's the trickiest to wrap you brain about but here it goes.

rule #1 of coding is to do as little of it as possible... make the code the most efficient and reusable, for any case possible. When someone writes a VJ soft, even a VJ soft with open architecture, it's still designed with that maker's basic goals in mind. Instead the best way to really approach it is to build as much functionality as you or anyone else can think of, and have an impartial person look at it. You should also provide a methodology for non tech-savvy users of adding functionality and customization.

7. GUI preference.

People prefer certain looks and interfaces.... and everyone tends to be highly opinionated upon these lines... people program inclined may prefer functionality-focused GUIs, others may prefer sleekness, and others a mix of the two.

8. Lack of professionalism

Perhaps the worst bit in the programming world, especially, the VJ programming world, is the lack of professionalism. I have heard complaints from various people about various coders, and I am sure such complaints circulate about myself.

9. Lack of Vision

Realtime video manipulation, done carefully, is the singe most difficult task a computer can undertake. It is normally non-accelerated, and could easily be expanded into conventional markets if programmers merely had the vision and professionalism to take them there.

10. Personal pride

Saying you made the program is a lot more prestigious, in my humble opinion, than saying you made the content.

11. File Format preference.

Applications tend to be based off of file formats the coder liked or was able to do easily. Multiplatform apps do so lazily, using QuickTime for both (QuickTime is notoriously slow on a PC, but speedy on a Mac)... thus a programmer will tend to provide capability for only the file formats he or she are fond of.

12. System preference.

People tend to go with either Mac's or PC's. Those who make an effort for both tend to fail miserably or do so lazily.

13. Injection of idealism.

Although idealistic in the same way that the pursuit of mathematical solutions is idealistic, computers and VJ programming should not be idealistic as people make it out to be. Programming should be related to efficiency, not ideals.... idealistic programming has tended in the past to lead to befuddled messes, with the notable exception being Linux (parts of which are a befuddled mess, but no more than parts of Windows).

14. Overcharging.

The argument has been used many times of having a "Photoshop" like too... an industry standard for the use of all people in said industry, with price tiers to match.. but this does not take into account:

a) the massive overhead of Adobe. Adobe advertises... a lot, and took a large hit into getting Photoshop into the market by packaging it early on with scanners and input devices. Sans advertising charging $300-$500 for a software that, provided you know a good duplicator, costs $2/CD to make.

b) Adobe's personnel overhead. Adobe Photoshop 7.0 lists some 40 names on it. The largest team I know of working on an app is VJo, which I believe is NOW four people. Again @ the schema of $2 a pop expenses VJo coders can make $25 a sale assuming the lack of fiscal management and war chesting (saving a portion of each into an account for the business)... but don't worry guys, ArKaos is the worst... as far as I can tell they employ less than you and charge 4x more.

c) point-revision.

Adobe products, Macromedia Products, and Microsoft, etc all provide point-revision updates. If Adobe Photoshop publishes 6.0.1. and you are registered, you get a free update. If they add small functionalities, or .1 revisions, you get a free upgrade. It's only half and full point revisions that require new purchase, and those have update rates.

15. Market closure/lack of support

This especially applies to many Japanese softs... but lack of multilingual manuals, speedy tech support, and extraordinarily buggy code tend to make for troublesome apps..



All right... I'm done... time to duck from all the other programmers on VJF.


James

[konsumgrafik]

Wow, that?s I guess complete. :rolleyes:
and I agree with you.

[eXhale]

in my opinion, personal pride is the only reason, all others are excuses ;)

never underestimate the power of ego.

[elbows]

Originally posted by pdoom


hey elbows, remember me? You're really sure I'm not coding at the moment? ;)

Hello :)

Yes of course I havent forgotten you, Im still dribling over your 3D stuff :D I just kinda thought of you as a member of the VJO team as your work is such a large part of the added R3.2 features.

By the way, is there a 3D SDK planned?

Thanks veryone for all the other comments. I can see what you mean with some of them, not sure about the Overcharging aspect of it though. Id bet some bodyparts that many of the "no longer maintained" VJ apps today are a result of lack of revenue. Whilst Adobe have massively huge overheads, they do have a much much larger target market.

eg lets say I was a programming God (lol some hope) and I wrote an app all on my own and made $25 profit per sale. Well, in order to pay for my own existence I would need to sell 600-1000 copies per year just to survive. But in reality Id probably be lucky to sell 200 copies. Thus I can see why such companies stuggle, its no way to get rich especially if you have 3 or 4 people on your team.

Oh well I cant program in any useful fast language so I dont have to worry about these things ;)

[pdoom]

elbows,
I'm not a member of the VJO team, but while making those plugins I was in very close contact with the team and they supported me a lot. But until now it's just a hobby, I'm not doing this to earn money or something.

About the 3D SDK: uhh... Yes, I totally forgot about that. There is already an SDK with a html documentation of all functions. It's just not public yet, becaues I'll a have to do some little refinements first, and there hasen't been a huge request for it anyway. Just keep on asking and I'll release it one day :)
No, seriously, if I don't forget about it I'll try to finish it next week or so.