Micha Clazing wrote:Surely Newtek can simply release an NDI OpenFX plugin? I don't see how BMD needs to be involved here.
i think, you do not even have a vague idea at all for what kind of practical purposes NDI and OpenFX were invented and why it doesn't make any sense to intermix this utterly unrelated approaches.
NDI is a connectivity solution, which allows you to utilize an ordinary local computer network for video streams. it's therefore more a kind of alternative to SDI or HDMI cabling, but especially focused on live video production and distributed monitoring, because the signal is (loosy) compressed in a similar manner as in Prores/DNxHR/HQX files. otherwise -- i.e. for uncompressed video transport over IP networks -- you would need very expensive advanced nd uncommon network infrastructure. NDI is therefore just a compromise to utilize much more affordable existing computer hardware in an acceptable manner resp. image quality and negligible latencies for practical video transport in more common envirionments.
OpenFX on the other hand, was invented as standard for video FX plugins -- or more precise: film and video related image processing, because it does not support sound/timecode/metadata information. in contrast to NDI it isn't optimized for any form of realtime constraints, but more oriented towards the demands of perfect image processing. sure, in some cases the OpenFX hosts may also utilize various technique to archive satisfying realtime processing (e.g. frame droping, prefetching and caching, distributing the load etc.), but that's not one of the main goals or common requirements of typical OpenFX usage.
in fact it would be even possible to write an OpenFX plugin, which could utilize at least some aspects of typical NDI capabilities. but that's more a theoretical point of view, because most OpenFX host -- and resolve in particular -- do not support the
OpenFX generator context in a sufficient manner. otherwise we could use this kind of interface also for file support extensions (e.g. wrapping ffmpeg) -- although without any sound/timecode/metadata support, which again has to be seen as unacceptable in practice.
if resolve would support NDI in a more adequate way, it would have to be done more like virtualized decklink devices -- a kind of of alternative input and output possibility over the network. but i wouldn't see it as much as a competing solution, it's more a complement to more traditional forms of video connectivity. in most real world scenarios it's simply not useful to utilize this kind of computer mediated video transport, but in those rare cases, where you really need this kind of remote access over the LAN, it's indeed a very nice solution to solve challenges in an extraordinary elegant manner.