Nathan Rusch <natha...@...>
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Foundry bug ID is 40576 in case anyone comes across this later and wants to poke them about it.
On Thursday, February 6, 2014 9:54:26 AM UTC-8, Nathan Rusch wrote:
Thanks Jeremy. Good to know I'm not missing something.
Unfortunately The Foundry have a tendency to drag their feet when it comes to updating third-party libraries, so they're still shipping OCIO 1.0.7 (even in Nuke 8... a little disappointing). I've got a request in with them, and I'll throw the reference number in this thread once I get one back in case anyone else wants to help apply more pressure. Tweak also seem to be using 1.0.7 in RV 4 as well.
Anyway, 1.0.7 doesn't provide a Config.addEnvironmentVar method, so it looks like I may be stuck with replacing the config outright or swapping out the OCIO libraries that ship with Nuke. I'll hold out hope for the future though...
Thanks again for the info.
On Wednesday, February 5, 2014 9:44:01 PM UTC-8, Jeremy Selan wrote:
It was definitely our intent to have a setCurrentContext, that looks
like an oversight.
In the meantime, can you see if your config object has a
"addEnvironmentVar" option? This was introduced rather recently, so I
am not sure if it's available in Nuke, but this would allow you to
modify value of existing entries in the context, and also add new
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Nathan Rusch <nath...@...> wrote:
> Hey all,
> I'm wondering if there has been any thought or discussion internally about
> allowing a config's Context to be replaced in place. I've been looking at
> ways to change the context variables of the active config on the fly using
> the Python bindings, and actually having them affect the existing processing
> environment, but after perusing the library and binding sources, it seems
> there isn't any way to do this currently.
> Some of the machinery is already there: You can get an editable copy of the
> active config's current context and modify its context variables to your
> heart's content. However, at that point, there isn't really anything useful
> you can do with that object unless you're actually doing color processing
> yourself. I was hoping to find a way to inject the updated context back into
> the currently active config via Python, to affect all future processor
> lookups within Nuke, but there's a distinct lack of symmetry to the
> interface in that regard.
> What I'm hoping for:
> config = ocio.GetCurrentConfig()
> ctx = config.getCurrentContext().createEditableCopy()
> ctx.setStringVar('FOO', 'BAR')
> config.setCurrentContext(ctx) # <-- The missing link
> Unless I'm mistaken, the only way to do something like this right now (at
> either the C++ or Python level) would be to modify the process environment
> (not ideal), and then call
> ocio.SetCurrentConfig(ocio.Config.CreateFromEnv()), which feels... dirty.
> Now, I'm guessing this isn't the first time you've crossed paths with an
> idea like this, so I feel like it's worth asking: Am I overlooking something
> blatantly obvious here? I've done my best to sniff out any existing
> functionality like this, but haven't found anything. However, if this is in
> fact a nonexistent feature, I'm wondering if there is a specific reason for
> excluding it, and if you would be willing to consider adding it in the
> Thanks for any information,
> P.S. In the case of Nuke, I know it's possible to work around this using
> node-level context overrides and making Nuke do the environment lookups for
> you using TCL, but that's far from an ideal solution when a simple context
> replacement would let me do the same thing much more cleanly (and doesn't
> address other applications).
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "OpenColorIO Developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to ocio-d...@....
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.