SDL Basics: Textures vs. Images

1
votes

I'm writing some code that uses SDL2 to display an image with moving markers layered on it, and I think I'd like to use the new (?) 2D hardware accelerated rendering. As I understand it, I have to load an image and convert it to a texture -- but what's the difference? Searching for 'image texture 2d sdl' only gets me tutorials on how to load textures and I'm looking for more of the background rather than the how-to.

So, some questions:

  • What's a texture versus an image? Aren't they the same thing?
  • Am I correct in assuming that I need to load the static background image as a texture if I want hardware accelerated rendering? In fact, it sounds like all the bits need to be textures for this to work.
  • Speaking of OpenGL, are SDL textures actually OpenGL textures?
  • I'm writing the main app for a single-purpose machine with limited resources (dual core ARM CPU, dual core Mali 400 GPU, 4GB RAM: Olimex A20 LIME2). All I need to do is render an 480x800 (yes, portrait layout) image and put markers on it. I expect the markers to have a single opaque and two transparency layers, to be updated at around 15 fps, and I expect about 125 of them, tops. Is it worth my while to use 2D hardware acceleration or should I just do it in software?
1
c++openglarmtexturessdl-2
What MayeulC said, and as for third question - it depends. It isn't just GLuint casted to SDL_Texture* type, it have internal structure, but yes, with GL rendering implementation it uses GL texture in its internal code. For other target (e.g. d3d or even software rendering) there will be no OpenGL, of course. – keltar

1 Answers

4
votes

To understand the basics of textures, I advise you to have a look at a simpler library's documentation. Here, the term pixmap is used in the same way as SDL's texture. Essentially, those are already converted and uploaded into your GPU's memory, which makes operations quite a bit faster, but also more complex to deal with.

OpenGL textures are another beast, but we could basically say that they are the same, that is, images in video memory. When binding a texture in OpenGL, you need to upload it to the GPU memory, which is somewhat similar to this texture transformation.

At 125 objects, I think considering using the 2D acceleration becomes worth the hassle, especially if you have to move them around. If this is just a static image, I guess you could go for the regular image route.

As a general rule, I encourage you to use 2D acceleration (or just acceleration, for that matter) whenever possible, if only for the battery improvements. With that said, if the images are static, the outcome will exactly be the same, maybe just slightly different code-path wise. As such, I suppose you could load the static background image just as a regular image without any downsides (note that I am not a SDL professional, so this mixed approach might not work here, but it is worth trying since it will work on most 2D toolkits).

I hope I answered all of your questions :)