We notice that there is undesirable interaction between the new displayCache and the set of active displays.
Previously, it was reasonable to have displays which were not in the active list. However, in 1.0.9, the displayCache culls the list of displays, even when writing out a config.
So, given this config:
ocio_profile_version: 1
search_path: luts
strictparsing: true
luma: [0.2126, 0.7152, 0.0722]
description: Check for active displays bug
displays:
AAA:
- !<View> {name: Film, colorspace: lnf}
BBB:
- !<View> {name: Film, colorspace: lnf}
CCC:
- !<View> {name: Film, colorspace: lnf}
active_displays: [AAA, BBB]
active_views: [Film]
colorspaces:
- !<ColorSpace>
name: lnf
family: ""
equalitygroup: ""
bitdepth: 32f
description: |
Linear colorspace
isdata: false
allocation: lg2
allocationvars: [-15, 6]
We can then run this python script to try to read it and write it. The result is that the getNumDisplays call only finds two displays, when there are three. The expectation would be for all three to be written to the new output config.
config = OCIO.GetCurrentConfig()
print(config.getNumDisplays())
fileHandle = open( "bugout.ocio", mode='w' )
fileHandle.write( config.serialize() )
fileHandle.close()
The resulting config looks like this:
ocio_profile_version: 1
search_path: luts
strictparsing: true
luma: [0.2126, 0.7152, 0.0722]
description: Check for active displays bug
roles:
{}
displays:
AAA:
- !<View> {name: Film, colorspace: lnf}
BBB:
- !<View> {name: Film, colorspace: lnf}
active_displays: [AAA, BBB]
active_views: [Film]
colorspaces:
- !<ColorSpace>
name: lnf
family: ""
equalitygroup: ""
bitdepth: 32f
description: |
Linear colorspace
isdata: false
allocation: lg2
allocationvars: [-15, 6]
Can we get clarity on the intent of the display cache, and how active displays is supposed to affect it (or not)?
Thanks,
RGB
