Blur effect on live scene?

Kevin Rushforth kevin.rushforth at
Thu Aug 13 21:30:56 UTC 2015

Jim Graham wrote:
> On 8/13/2015 12:33 PM, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
>> * Node caching was intended as a hint to the system to cache the result
>> of potentially expensive effects into a texture (which is rendered into
>> by the GPU) and re-render that texture when needed. Jim was suggesting
>> that an application might be able to use that mechanism to do something
>> other than its original purpose.
> I'm not sure my suggestions were fully understood.  I didn't mean to 
> imply that the node cache property and hints could be used as a 
> "render to texture and give me the texture" mechanism, but that many 
> cases where the developer might think "what I want is a mechanism to 
> render some scene into a texture so that I could do something with it" 
> really boil down to cases where sprinkling in a few setCache(true) 
> calls might achieve what they want more directly.

Yes, that is a more clear way to look at it.

> In the end, we'd rather have a direct mechanism to have the developer 
> tell us what they want to have happen and then we might cache various 
> parts of the scene graph automatically in pursuit of that goal so that 
> the developer doesn't have to think about "well I know this is going 
> to perform badly so I want to start caching my own pixels".  The node 
> cache property is sort of a request to "do that pixel caching thing 
> for me", but with limited scope.  Sometimes, though, that limited 
> scope is exactly what the application needs.
> My subsequent mail that gave a few examples of regrouping items with 
> effects and cache properties being set demonstrates how node caching 
> is intended to take care of these details for you...

Hopefully one of our enterprising app developers can try it and report 
the results.


-- Kevin

>         ...jim

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list