Experiments..

General questions about Indigo, the scene format, rendering etc...
User avatar
Caronte
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 7:17 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Caronte » Wed Jun 13, 2007 9:50 am

:shock::shock::shock::shock:
Awesome
Sorry about my poor english ;)

Ricky
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 3:38 am

Post by Ricky » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:04 am

Wow!
Last edited by Ricky on Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:19 am, edited 5 times in total.

tinman999
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:29 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by tinman999 » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:06 am

OnoSendai wrote: I'm still thinking about how to handle the volume data formats etc...
Any more suggestions are welcome!
Off the top of my head :)

Assuming you're using grids to represent the 3d data,
the simpliest choice would be a spar list of 2d image, when storing the datset on file each 2d image can be compress by zlib or some other compression library. For example assuming you got a grid xyz of size 30x30x30, only x at 0, 5, 10, 12, 14, 25, 30 contain non-zero data you could stored it like this

xyz <- index order
7 <- number of entries
0, image 1
5, image 2
10, image 3
12, image 4
14, image 5
25, image 6
30, image 7

trilinear interpolation is simple to do and more advance sampling and reconstruction method should be ok too

Another option would be to replace the 2d image slice with n 1d polynomial depending on how empty it is and how smooth you want the data to be.

User avatar
eman7613
Posts: 597
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 2:52 pm

Post by eman7613 » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:48 am

manitwo wrote::shock: you can be really proud of yourself - so go and get yourself a beer now - you deserve it :)
and a woman or two! :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

I wont pretend that i can contribute to the theories being represented, but i have a question. One of the new toys (well, for me anyway) in Cinem4D is pyrocluster (clouds and smoke and that stuff) but it can also make them illuminate nearby objects * stuff ie: fire. Could you code this into indigo with the new toy?
Yes i know, my spelling sucks

Anthony
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:42 pm

Post by Anthony » Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:07 pm

Lord of the Rings Junkie wrote:Hold your horses guys, an Earth-sized sphere is a far cry from a planet with full terrain! Awesome feature though, absolutely cannot wait!:D What's next, a scale Sun model 93 billion miles from Earth?:) (Hopefully it wouldn't take light 8 minutes to reach your render...)lol

[Edit] Both linear and rotational motion blur would be cool things to see in 0.9
lol he was making a not so subtle reference to the book "The Hitchhiker's Guid to the Galaxy" where mice are actually the most intelligent beings on Earth and if I remember right they build planets, or at least someone builds planets, and the most fun parts to make are the coastlines and fjords.

User avatar
Zom-B
1st Place 100
Posts: 4697
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:18 pm
Location: ´'`\_(ò_Ó)_/´'`
Contact:

Post by Zom-B » Thu Jun 14, 2007 12:35 am

OnoSendai wrote:It would be relatively simple to read in a list of particles, and 'splat' them into a volume map, using some kind of 3d filter for each particle (e.g. gaussian, step function, etc..)
Then the volume map could be used for rendering.
Alternatively the particles could be stored in their own data structure, which might be better for sparser sets, but that would be a bit trickier to code.
Does this means that a new generic Indigo particle Format is needed, that the 3D aplications have to export to (via new developed export Plugin)???

This would perhaps give you (Ono) the most flexibility for your interaction with this particle files.... ergo better and faster visual results.

The Drawback will be the developement time for each 3D application ...
polygonmanufaktur.de

StompinTom
Indigo 100
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:33 pm

Post by StompinTom » Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:05 am

ZomB wrote:
OnoSendai wrote:It would be relatively simple to read in a list of particles, and 'splat' them into a volume map, using some kind of 3d filter for each particle (e.g. gaussian, step function, etc..)
Then the volume map could be used for rendering.
Alternatively the particles could be stored in their own data structure, which might be better for sparser sets, but that would be a bit trickier to code.
Does this means that a new generic Indigo particle Format is needed, that the 3D aplications have to export to (via new developed export Plugin)???

This would perhaps give you (Ono) the most flexibility for your interaction with this particle files.... ergo better and faster visual results.

The Drawback will be the developement time for each 3D application ...
well i think most, if not all, 3d programs used here have particles so i think its a matter of translating particle position/density and maybe even speed and direction into an Indigo particle format. or if particle density could create a 3d grid (maybe what tinman999 was talking about?). this is really cool.

User avatar
Kram1032
Posts: 6649
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:55 am
Location: Austria near Vienna

Post by Kram1032 » Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:00 am

SketchUp don't have paritcles...

User avatar
OnoSendai
Developer
Posts: 6226
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 6:16 pm
Location: Wellington, NZ
Contact:

Post by OnoSendai » Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:01 am

Sketchup doesn't count :)

Deus
Posts: 336
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:47 am

Post by Deus » Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:10 am

thats great. Ill need that :P

User avatar
Kram1032
Posts: 6649
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:55 am
Location: Austria near Vienna

Post by Kram1032 » Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:11 am

:shock: :shock: :shock:
Deus wrote:thats great. Ill need that :P
:shock: :shock: :shock:

User avatar
arneoog
Indigo 100
Posts: 504
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:19 am
Contact:

Post by arneoog » Thu Jun 14, 2007 6:03 am

Kram1032 wrote::shock: :shock: :shock:
Deus wrote:thats great. Ill need that :P
:shock: :shock: :shock:
Agree :shock:





:lol: :P

User avatar
OnoSendai
Developer
Posts: 6226
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 6:16 pm
Location: Wellington, NZ
Contact:

Post by OnoSendai » Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:07 am

Just a little update...
My scattering coefficient *was* off by an order of magnitude :)
I now have (approximate) Mie scattering for the sky as well as Rayleigh scattering.

Phase function for the clouds is still completely wrong :)

The camera viewpoint is raised 100m off the ground here, so you can see the shadows of the clouds.
Attachments
blueclouds.png
blueclouds.png (571.78 KiB) Viewed 3630 times

User avatar
Zom-B
1st Place 100
Posts: 4697
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:18 pm
Location: ´'`\_(ò_Ó)_/´'`
Contact:

Post by Zom-B » Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:19 am

I'm really interested about the final possibile parameters for the sky...
Could you drop some lines about the controllable parameters?!

hope to see some more pics these days ^^
(a clean cloud rendering [over night] would be sweeeeeeeet!)
polygonmanufaktur.de

User avatar
Caronte
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 7:17 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Caronte » Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:22 am

Looks Better and better :shock:

The shader is very nice :o when the clouds have a better shape, the results will be awesome :D

Thanks!
Sorry about my poor english ;)

Post Reply
250 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests