 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Invisible escribió:
>> I see. So there's a discontinuity in the 1st derivative then? ;-)
>>
>
> On the What?
>
> o_0
Speed is the first derivating of position with respect to time.
In other words, the consecutive frames match, but the movement does not.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Try it. Make a video of A, A, B->A backwards, B, B. See if the morph
>> looks OK.
>
> Actually, don't. I'll try to do it for you.
Isn't as noticeable as I expected (maybe it's because of the morph I
picked) but definitely there is a jump.
http://www.wikifortio.com/798356/test.mpg.zip (10MB)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> I can remember when decoding MPEG-1 in realtime required specialised
> hardware - and encoding required a very high-end computer system!
Bah. I was out of grad school and people were still building and selling
hardware JPEG cards, let alone MPEG. :-)
The 6 minutes of mpeg we had to demo the system took 14 weeks to encode
at a service beureau.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> Rune wrote:
>> "Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote?
>>> Now, if I could make it download some more sheep... (You'd think 350
>>> would be enough. However, it seems to be more like 15 actual images,
>>> plus 15! morphs between them. Which isn't so interesting.)
>>
>> Why 15! ?
>>
>> For X images, wouldn't the necassary morphs between them be only
>> X*(X-1)/2 and not X! ?
>
> Hmm. Your knowledge of combinatorics clearly exceeds mine considerably...
> :-}
Sounds odd, given that I don't understand most of the math you normally post
about here...
Anyway, since both forward and backwards morphs are needed, as well as the
loops themselves, that would be exactly X^2 animations if all loops should
be connected to all other loops (X loops and X*(X-1) transitions between
them).
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I can remember when decoding MPEG-1 in realtime required specialised
>> hardware - and encoding required a very high-end computer system!
>
> Bah. I was out of grad school and people were still building and selling
> hardware JPEG cards, let alone MPEG. :-)
Ooo... LOL!
> The 6 minutes of mpeg we had to demo the system took 14 weeks to encode
> at a service beureau.
ADVANCED!!
[Hmm, POV-Ray service beureau, anyone?]
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Now, if I could make it download some more sheep... (You'd think 350
>> would be enough. However, it seems to be more like 15 actual images,
>> plus 15! morphs between them. Which isn't so interesting.)
>
> There aren't morphs for all possible combinations. Nowhere near that.
For what it's worth... I just checked the stats page. Flock 202 (the
current flock) contains 74 loops and 457 edges.
Weirdly, 74 loops *sounds* like a lot, but doesn't *look* like a lot
when you see them all at once:
http://sheepserver.net/v2d6/cgi/status.cgi
Also surprising, most of the votes are counted in single figures. I
would have expected them to run into tens of thousands, but apparently
not. I'm not sure whether this means each one gets approximately 50% up
and 50% down votes, or there are only about 10 people voting worldwide...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> [Hmm, POV-Ray service beureau, anyone?]
>
I have one.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> or there are only about 10 people voting worldwide...
>
Are *you* voting? :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> or there are only about 10 people voting worldwide...
>
> Are *you* voting? :)
Yes. Quite a lot.
Obviously, I wasn't expecting my few votes to make a difference among
the many millions of other votes... but now I'm not so sure. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well, it seems [with some difficulty] that it is possible to reconfigure
my ADSL router to allow inbound connections. I also adjusted the upload
and download limits on ES to 200 KB each way (was 100).
So far, the most noticable effect is that my outbound has gone from
about 3 KB to 20 KB.
Also, I notice with some puzzlement that in the evenings my download
rate is between 9 KB and 20 KB, but in the mornings its 90 or so.
(Actually, this morning it hit 120 KB. I guess those changed settings
make a difference...)
I also notice virtually no rendering taking place. I saw a comment
somewhere in the forums about "I'm keeping the flock quiet in
anticipation of ES 2.6.7 and high def rendering..." Interesting.
And finally... why does the "number of sheep on this computer" go down
from time to time?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
