 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi. Christian here.
I've got this idea:
(Well, it's quite complex (for me), so I'll simplify in a few lines)
How about to attach a comlex blob structure (a creature or someting) with an
spline "squeleton", to achieve organical motion?
I was thinking about develping a SW to model with blobs but not placing them
manually over the space, but trough splines.
(Lots of ideas - sorry, didn't take my RTF file with all of them to this
public cabine)
Basically, good control over the creation of automated structures of blobs
(via gradient controls that would control varius aspects of the blob
creation), good managment of the movement of subyacent splines (around the
control points) and over the evaluated surface of a main blob... well, lot
of crazy things I've been dreaming of. If some of you are interested about
this... HELP ME!!!
It'd be great, you know, to create all kinds of complex creatures, to
texture them (as blobs kindly blend between materials) and... well, to get
rid of the idea that only with meshes someone could have organic movements
of characters.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002 14:36:04 EDT, "Christian" <las### [at] hotmail com> wrote:
> How about to attach a comlex blob structure (a creature or someting) with an
> spline "squeleton", to achieve organical motion?
You mean sphere_sweeps or blob components follow spline placed in loop?
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ABX, I mean to make splines in the first place. Then, with a gradiente
editor, control de varius aspects of the blob creation. Colors would affect
in one way or other this values, like density, treshold, etc.
Or you could place blobs manually.
Or you could attach other splines to the mother one.
Blobs would be standar ones or user defined.
Animation would become at animating these splines.
What do you think about it?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well, guys, sorry, but I got to leave the news server for now... got to go
to my college. Maybe in the afternoon I'll post the complete content of the
RTF here, so you can understand better what I'd like to propose...
If you'd like to mail me (but communication in this server is fine, but as I
said, if you'd like to), here's my personal contact info:
mails: sol### [at] latinmailcom
las### [at] hotmailcom
Bye for now!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It would be a difficult project, but indeed possible. However, I don't
think it would be worth the trouble for one reason: Blobs can't be
UV-mapped.
Even though the textures of blob components are smoothly blended
together, the textures will still look ugly when the figure is animated,
because the textures don't follow the skin properly. Well, it might be
possible to make it look ok in a few cases, especially if the textures
are rather plain. But in general I don't think it's a very good idea...
:/
I still think that only with meshes you can have organic movement of
(textured) characters.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
rune|vision: http://runevision.com (updated July 12)
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
>It would be a difficult project, but indeed possible. However, I don't
>think it would be worth the trouble for one reason: Blobs can't be
>UV-mapped.
But they can be bitmapped... And it'd be increadible usefull! Create simple
bitmaps to reuse... and procedurals are procedurals :)
>Even though the textures of blob components are smoothly blended
>together, the textures will still look ugly when the figure is animated,
>because the textures don't follow the skin properly. Well, it might be
>possible to make it look ok in a few cases, especially if the textures
>are rather plain. But in general I don't think it's a very good idea...
>:/
>
It's not really true that, my friend. I've seen how it's done with other
packages... (but I don't really know HOW they do it...) textures CAN be
attached and fixed to blobs (although, I don't know if that it's possible
with the current implementation of POV... but there might be a patch for
that, right?)
And mathematics is a flexible language... there might not be a need to
rediscover America or the powder, you know...
>I still think that only with meshes you can have organic movement of
>(textured) characters.
Well... I disagree. I just try to make a difference, you know. Maybe I
didn't explain myself very well.
Please, wait till I post the whole idea!!!!!
Bye for now. And cool with you, Rune! Thank you for the constructive
criticism and for your opinion. You know, it helps a lot when something
yourself.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in news:web.3d768ff9fac2eacda1b60c80@news.povray.org Christian wrote:
> I've seen how it's done with other
> packages...
you mean like Softy3D?
http://www.softy3d.com/en/index.htm
Ingo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Rune
Subject: Re: About a (maybe) cool idea with blobs and splines...
Date: 4 Sep 2002 19:36:04
Message: <3d7698e4@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian wrote:
> It's not really true that, my friend. I've seen
> how it's done with other packages... (but I don't
> really know HOW they do it...)
I thought we were talking about blobs in POV-Ray.
And you're entirely sure that in those programs where you've seen it,
the blobs aren't tessellated into triangle meshes first? In other words,
the other programs you mention are also raytracers?
Otherwise I stick to what I said.
> textures CAN be attached and fixed to blobs (although,
> I don't know if that it's possible with the current
> implementation of POV...
It isn't possible to make a texture attached and fixed on the surface of
a blob object in POV-Ray. I'm pretty sure that the only possible ways of
doing that would be to tessellate the blob object, in which case it
would indeed be a triangle mesh.
> but there might be a patch for that, right?)
No.
> And mathematics is a flexible language... there
> might not be a need to rediscover America or the
> powder, you know...
You make things sound very easy.
>> I still think that only with meshes you can
>> have organic movement of (textured) characters.
>
> Well... I disagree. I just try to make a difference,
> you know. Maybe I didn't explain myself very well.
>
> Please, wait till I post the whole idea!!!!!
Ok. I'll probably have more constructive criticism by then. :)
By the way, many of us here are trying to make a difference. That's what
makes this community great.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
rune|vision: http://runevision.com (updated July 12)
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian says:
....
(sigh)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian wrote:
> Christian says:
>
> ....
>
> (sigh)
In newsgroups, quoting the piece of text that is being replied to is
generally considered a good way to make it easier to understand the
context of a reply. :)
For example, I don't know if you were sighing because if this:
> It isn't possible to make a texture attached and fixed
> on the surface of a blob object in POV-Ray.
...or this:
> By the way, many of us here are trying to make a
> difference. That's what makes this community great.
Though in this case I can try to guess...
Anyway, I would still be interested in seeing your whole idea.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
rune|vision: http://runevision.com (updated July 12)
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
