Hey, I wouldn't mind working on the graphics, I just don't know where to start or
who else is working on it.

Jan


On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 09:18 , Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk> sent:

>On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 11:45:53 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
>> VST plugins tend to be rather complex, offering tons of features and
>> eyecandish GUIs, while LADSPAs usually offer limited functionality, no
>> GUI at all(hosts usually provide simple ones to control the parameters).
>> But what's interesting is that each LADSPA plugin usually implements
>> exactly one type of DSP technique, for example, an oscillator, or a
>> delay. This basically leads to a situation where a certain DSP technique
>> is 'isolated' in a separate plugin.
>
>I think thats down to two factors (and its not a good thing)
>
>1) LADSPA developers are few in number and short in time. The basics are a
>   good place to start.
>
>2) The lack of a UI standard makes complex plugins a bit pointless.
>
>There are a few counter examples (e.g. my VyNil plugin wraps a lot of
>different bits), and infact if you look in many LADSPA plugins you will
>see theres really more going on than there appears to be.
>
>[OT] - my canned plugin writing experience - all generalisations and IMHO
>       of course
>
>  Time breakdown: 10% writing code, 10% maths and optimising, 80% tweaking
>  and tuning.
>
>  Mapping the controls 1:1 with DSP parameters makes plugins crap - people
>  say they want that if you ask them, but they dont mean it ;)
>
>  Fewer controls is better.
>
>  Affordance, appearance and usability has as much affect on the perceived
>  sound quality as the DSP code (posivly and negativly). Some of this can
>  be achieved without a custom UI.
>
>You mentioned JAMin - true that does use LADSPA plugins - but of the total
>ammount of code the LADSPA plugins are a tiny fraction. I just reused them
>because I hate fixing bugs in two places :)
>
>[OOT] I used to think that a UI spec for LADSPA (to make it competetive
>with VST) was a technological problem. I now thinks its a manpower issue
>(I think Paul Davis pointed this out a couple of years ago :). Games
>develpment has moved to the point where the graphics work is more
>expensive than the software development, and I bet its not far off in
>plugin / eyecandy app development. We have no, or almost no, graphics
>people here.
>
>There are plenty of graphics people working on Free Software projects, but
>they all seem to be working on games projects. What a waste. I guess
>drawing goblins is more fun than sliders and LEDs. Who knew? ;)
>





