 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15-10-2012 14:49, Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> Let's see if I can stop playing, so I can fork Koppi's code to create
> a more POV-oriented version: I'm envisioning some simple features that
> will make the life of any POV user much easier...
By the tits of the Satrap! (Sorry, I should not use the Satrap's name in
blasphemy. Very unhealthy) I already can see this in the harbour of
Gancaloon!
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Jaime Vives Piqueres on date 15/10/2012 14.49 wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> This is getting really dangerous... I managed to fix the segfaults on
> Koppi's bullet physics playground, and now the fun has no end. I even
> managed to add bare mesh support, as the lib3ds code was there and
> almost finished, and this opens a whole universe of "now possible"
> scenes. I don't know how I'm going to get any serious work done from now
> on...
>
> For the moment there are no compound nor constrains, just rigid meshes
> linked together because of the geometry and careful placement: the
> simulation does it's job, and the links work, even if sometimes break
> due to accuracy problems (still haven't decided if it's a bug or a
> feature).
>
> Let's see if I can stop playing, so I can fork Koppi's code to create
> a more POV-oriented version: I'm envisioning some simple features that
> will make the life of any POV user much easier...
>
> --
> Jaime
Please, stop post photos here...
;-)
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignorancia org> wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> This is getting really dangerous... I managed to fix the segfaults on
> Koppi's bullet physics playground, and now the fun has no end. I even
> managed to add bare mesh support, as the lib3ds code was there and
> almost finished, and this opens a whole universe of "now possible"
> scenes. I don't know how I'm going to get any serious work done from now
> on...
>
> For the moment there are no compound nor constrains, just rigid meshes
> linked together because of the geometry and careful placement: the
> simulation does it's job, and the links work, even if sometimes break
> due to accuracy problems (still haven't decided if it's a bug or a feature).
>
> Let's see if I can stop playing, so I can fork Koppi's code to create
> a more POV-oriented version: I'm envisioning some simple features that
> will make the life of any POV user much easier...
>
> --
> Jaime
Wow, these are really impressive. I want to start playing around with Koppi's
bullet physics playground. Anyone have tips on getting it working on OS X?
Henry
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15/10/12 18:43, HenryW wrote:
> I want to start playing around with Koppi's bullet physics
> playground. Anyone have tips on getting it working on OS X?
I don't recommend it, as you can reach insane levels of fun, and mean
REALLY insane.
Anyhow, if you want to try it, you may need to put some hard work to
get it compiled. The author has not wrote anything into the wiki howto,
but seems he plans to... the problems is that he is unreachable until
mid-december. I really don't know for sure, but I think all the
libraries used in the project must be available for OS X, and gcc too,
so it should be relatively easy if you already have experience compiling
from sources on OS X.
In any case, if you manage to compile it, then contact me for the
fixes I did to the current code on github, else you will not be able to
do much with it.
Regards,
--
Jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15/10/12 19:36, Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> I don't recommend it, as you can reach insane levels of fun, and
> mean REALLY insane.
See the attached screen-shot from the GL preview: do you see what I
mean? ;)
--
Jaime
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'pantallazo.jpg' (41 KB)
Preview of image 'pantallazo.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2012-10-15 07:49, Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> For the moment there are no compound nor constrains, just rigid meshes
> linked together because of the geometry and careful placement: the
> simulation does it's job, and the links work, even if sometimes break
> due to accuracy problems (still haven't decided if it's a bug or a
> feature).
Speaking of constraints, there's this thing I've heard about called
Verlet integration, which I don't know how it compares directly to the
cloth and hair simulation in Poser, but suspect it's different and
better/faster...ever played with that at all?
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> This is getting really dangerous... I managed to fix the segfaults on
> Koppi's bullet physics playground, and now the fun has no end. I even
> managed to add bare mesh support, as the lib3ds code was there and
> almost finished, and this opens a whole universe of "now possible"
> scenes. I don't know how I'm going to get any serious work done from now
> on...
Sounds like you're making great strides, and what you're accomplishing now is
serious enough, IMO. You're enhancing an existing tool for the creation of more
complex scenes. Will there ever be a Windows build? :)
> For the moment there are no compound nor constrains, just rigid meshes
> linked together because of the geometry and careful placement: the
> simulation does it's job, and the links work, even if sometimes break
> due to accuracy problems (still haven't decided if it's a bug or a feature).
I was having that problem with Blender's Bullet implementation. I was trying to
use mesh links as well, but they would break sometimes. Do you have an option of
increasing the sim's accuracy? It might help.
Nice test scenes, BTW. The chain material looks a bit like lead, though (despite
the interior rust). If radiosity took into account a finish's brilliance, it
would look much better. Sometimes the only cure is to drive the diffuse down,
raise the reflection, add a tiny bumps normal, and render the scene with focal
blur.
The pearls look good as well, almost photographic. I wonder how several
concentric, translucent and refractive spheres with that pearl texture would
turn out...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15-10-2012 19:38, Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> On 15/10/12 19:36, Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
>> I don't recommend it, as you can reach insane levels of fun, and
>> mean REALLY insane.
>
> See the attached screen-shot from the GL preview: do you see what I
> mean? ;)
This is the kind of (in)sanity that I am willing to plunge into without
a thought...
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 16/10/12 01:36, Tim Cook wrote:
> Speaking of constraints, there's this thing I've heard about called
> Verlet integration, which I don't know how it compares directly to
> the cloth and hair simulation in Poser, but suspect it's different
> and better/faster...ever played with that at all?
>
No, sorry... this is my first approach to physics simulations, and all
I know for the moment is about rigid bodies. But I've seen some awesome
cloth physics on the bullet demos, indeed... will get there someday, I
guess.
--
Jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 16/10/12 05:38, Samuel Benge wrote:
> [...] Will there ever be a Windows build? :)
I think Koppi has successfully built it on Windows, or at least his
building-howto seems to suggest it. But I'm guessing he is not planning
to distribute and support binaries... will ask him anyhow, to see if we
can at least have some unofficial binaries to distribute here.
> I was having that problem with Blender's Bullet implementation. I was trying to
> use mesh links as well, but they would break sometimes. Do you have an option of
> increasing the sim's accuracy? It might help.
Well, I was referring to accuracy of the meshes, not the simulation:
I discovered that just subdividing the problematic parts of the mesh was
enough to make it more resistant to breaking. The breaking seemed to
occur at places were both bodies didn't have vertex to collide with.
I also discovered that size really matters too... don't make your
objects too small. At first, I started with the default Wings3D scale of
1-2 units, but later scaled it x10 and things seem to work better.
One last note: I also noticed that centering the mesh model seems
important for the mass-center of the object later on the simulation.
> Nice test scenes, BTW.
Actually, I've rendered a lot more, mostly "piles of things" using
existing models of mine, but didn't want to flood the newsgroups with
them (I should update my web site ASAP, if I can get out of the playground).
> The chain material looks a bit like lead, though
Yeah... reflections were taking too much time, so I used just
metallic specular albedo.
> (despite the interior rust).
That was a nice trick with a scaled spherical pattern, profiting from
the object specific shape... no uv_mapping at all.
> raise the reflection, add a tiny bumps normal, and render the scene with focal
> blur.
Yes, and wait until next week for the image, I guess... ;)
> The pearls look good as well, almost photographic.
#declare n_pearl=
normal{
radial sine_wave
frequency 36*4
rotate 90*z
}
#declare t_pearl=
material{
texture{
pigment {
aoi
color_map{
[0 Wheat*.5+Coral*.5]
[1 White]
}
}
normal{n_pearl .05}
finish{
specular albedo .25 metallic roughness .025 diffuse .75 brilliance 2
reflection{0,1 metallic}
conserve_energy
irid {
0.35
thickness .1
turbulence .5
}
}
}
}
Got it just by trial&error...
> I wonder how several concentric, translucent and refractive spheres with that pearl
texture would
> turn out...
Hmmm... no time to try it now, but it's a nice suggestion that I will
surely try out.
--
Jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
