 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"laser" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> I'm a programmer.
I am . . . shocked. ;)
> I probably have seen the raytracer you mention, but I can't quite remember what
> it was like right now.
https://wiki.povray.org/content/Documentation:Tutorial_Section_3.8#SDL_tutorial:_A_raytracer
> I mostly go right to "Image Digest" and don't always
> read the posts
I'm sure if you've just been skimming, then you must be a very busy guy.
> (but I have seen your name often :-) )
Well, yeah. I've been playing with this for a long time now, and have
progressed from kindergarten level stick figure renders to refactoring and
debugging the source code.
>
> If you want to see some of the stuff I've done,
Thanks - I look forward to reading/watching all that.
(Loved the Pink Floyd article!)
> An x86 assembly raytracer I wrote
Jeez. I haven't written assembly since I bought a pamphlet that taught me to
write assembly for my Commodore Vic-20 and save the code on a tape drive. :O
> And a GLSL version can be viewed on my shadertoy
> page: <www.shadertoy.com/user/mrmcsoftware>
What's up with shadertoy? I can't get the site to open on any machine or
browser that I've tried. For a long while now.
It's one of my primary references for helping me get my brain solidly into
functional-programming mode. :(
> Sorry about all the self-promoting, but they all are along the same lines we're
> talking about - unorthodox ways of doing raytracing.
Hopefully you make regular visits - it's always nice to see other people's work
- for inspiration, learning, and just simple enjoyment.
Nice to finally meet you.
- BE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscape net> wrote:
> "laser" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> > I probably have seen the raytracer you mention, but I can't quite remember what
> > it was like right now.
>
>
https://wiki.povray.org/content/Documentation:Tutorial_Section_3.8#SDL_tutorial:_A_raytracer
>
That looks rather interesting - thanks for the link. I got a kick out of the
"colored mesh" part.
> > I mostly go right to "Image Digest" and don't always
> > read the posts
>
> I'm sure if you've just been skimming, then you must be a very busy guy.
Yeah, my todo list is getting longer. But there's often too much information to
go through. I've been using the internet since 1987 (pre-http) so I've seen
both lack of information and too much information. Too much is better, This
page is a nice throwback to my USENET days though.
> > If you want to see some of the stuff I've done,
> Thanks - I look forward to reading/watching all that.
> (Loved the Pink Floyd article!)
Glad to hear it. I always hope Roger Waters would read it and let me know what
he thinks.
> > An x86 assembly raytracer I wrote
>
> Jeez. I haven't written assembly since I bought a pamphlet that taught me to
> write assembly for my Commodore Vic-20 and save the code on a tape drive. :O
I guess then we're both about the same age - a VIC-20 is how I started, A tape
drive came later unfortunately - after a failed attempt to create a tape
recorder interface that I saw at a science fair. Maybe the interface worked but
the VIC-20 didn't like my cassette recorder since I think a tape recorder
interface I bought didn't work either.
> What's up with shadertoy? I can't get the site to open on any machine or
> browser that I've tried. For a long while now.
> It's one of my primary references for helping me get my brain solidly into
> functional-programming mode. :(
A few months or more ago they added the human verification/check because they
were getting hit by too much traffic or something. They felt it was caused by
AI scrapers, I don't know if they would have done it if someone on twitter
hadn't recommended adding the human check, It is very annoying, but the site
does work for me once I wait the rather long time (not "it's never going to
work" long though) to get to the checkbox, If your browser is too old (I'm not
saying yours is, just pointing out a possible issue), you will get an infinite
loop of trying to verify with no checkbox ever showing up.
> Hopefully you make regular visits - it's always nice to see other people's work
> - for inspiration, learning, and just simple enjoyment.
>
> Nice to finally meet you.
> - BE
Nice to meet/talk to you as well. Yeah, inspiration and learning are very
important.
- Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/21/26 00:21, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Post something. It doesn't matter what it is.
> Really. Just post it. Here.
Ok ok. I've been working on this animation for two years,
and i now publish this version, just a work in progress,
but is a nice land for a lot of enhancements.
https://tube.interhacker.space/w/rNEQbXXZGZFnoabG7uB6FR
--
** **
* tTh des Bourtoulots *
* http://maison.tth.netlib.re/ *
** **
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"laser" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> I guess then we're both about the same age - a VIC-20 is how I started, A tape
> drive came later unfortunately - after a failed attempt to create a tape
> recorder interface that I saw at a science fair. Maybe the interface worked but
> the VIC-20 didn't like my cassette recorder since I think a tape recorder
> interface I bought didn't work either.
Well, I started like everyone else using TRS-80's, and my first home computer
was a Timex Sinclair 1000. Then a VIC-20, Then an Atari 800XL.
I didn't buy myself a "real" computer until after college.
I miss the joystick port. That was like my own interface to the outside world.
I suppose I could just use a Raspberry Pi, but being able to have a simple
makeshift I/O port was really fun.
> > What's up with shadertoy?
>
> ... It is very annoying, but the site
> does work for me once I wait the rather long time (not "it's never going to
> work" long though) to get to the checkbox,
I only get a black page that says "Bad request"
> If your browser is too old
I'm using M$ Edge.
- BE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 26.03.26 um 20:26 schrieb tTh:
> On 3/21/26 00:21, Bald Eagle wrote:
>
>> Post something. It doesn't matter what it is.
>> Really. Just post it. Here.
>
> Ok ok. I've been working on this animation for two years,
> and i now publish this version, just a work in progress,
> but is a nice land for a lot of enhancements.
>
> https://tube.interhacker.space/w/rNEQbXXZGZFnoabG7uB6FR
>
Interesting and technically well-executed, but difficult to interpret
without an explanation of what’s happening here. On your website, I
found some French explanations which I first had to translate using
DeepL.com, but which do help with understanding. Perhaps you should
present your ideas a bit more clearly here. As I cannot find the source
of your inspiration (a sci-fi illustration site from the last century
featuring futuristic cities and cone-shaped buildings) without further
clues, and I therefore cannot know how closely your scenario mirrors
this – possibly dystopian – model, I can only say that the scenery
strikes me as conveying a somewhat too gloomy atmosphere. Does the sun
not shine in this universe?
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>
> Well, I started like everyone else using TRS-80's, and my first home computer
> was a Timex Sinclair 1000. Then a VIC-20, Then an Atari 800XL.
> I didn't buy myself a "real" computer until after college.
>
> I miss the joystick port. That was like my own interface to the outside world.
> I suppose I could just use a Raspberry Pi, but being able to have a simple
> makeshift I/O port was really fun.
>
My path was owning a VIC-20 first, then Commodore 64, then Amiga 2000 with XT
Bridgeboard, then a TI-99 4A I bought at a rummage sale for I think around 2
dollars, then various PCs and a Mac or two (Macs either given to me or at
rummage sale for a dollar or five).
My interface port of choice was the VIC-20 User port - parallel port that was
easy to program.
> > > What's up with shadertoy?
> >
> > ... It is very annoying, but the site
> > does work for me once I wait the rather long time (not "it's never going to
> > work" long though) to get to the checkbox,
>
> I only get a black page that says "Bad request"
>
> > If your browser is too old
> I'm using M$ Edge.
>
> - BE
Hmmm.,. I don't know what would cause that. Any chance you live in a country
that cloudflare.com wouldn't service (they are the company providing the human
verification test). I don't know if there is any country that cloudflare
doesn't work in though. The internet says the typical things: clear browser
cache, clear cookies (maybe too many cookies), check URL for errors, check to
make sure browser extensions aren't screwing it up, try a different browser,
etc. But you said it happens on multiple browsers so I don't think it would be
any of that.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"laser" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Hmmm.,. I don't know what would cause that.
Corporate network security.
It used to load, and now it doesn't.
Tried it on my home machine, and it works.
So at least I can enjoy all the eye candy and juicy shader code.
On a not-unrelated note: 3Blue1Brown just posted a great video on taking the
logarithm of an image. It's probably not at all what you think, and way more
interesting than the title sounds.
I've also had my eye on reproducing the methods used in the paper the video is
based on for several months. That's sure to give be a solid base for moving
forward on it. :)
- BE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2026-03-30 à 08:57, Bald Eagle a écrit :
> "laser" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
>> Hmmm.,. I don't know what would cause that.
>
> Corporate network security.
> It used to load, and now it doesn't.
>
> Tried it on my home machine, and it works.
> So at least I can enjoy all the eye candy and juicy shader code.
>
>
>
> On a not-unrelated note: 3Blue1Brown just posted a great video on taking the
> logarithm of an image. It's probably not at all what you think, and way more
> interesting than the title sounds.
>
>
> - BE
>
>
>
Watched that video. Very interesting indeed.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> Tried it on my home machine, and it works.
> So at least I can enjoy all the eye candy and juicy shader code.
That's good. Unfortunately, I do think the quality of the shaders has gone down
a bit. Not as many "wow"s.
> On a not-unrelated note: 3Blue1Brown just posted a great video on taking the
> logarithm of an image. It's probably not at all what you think, and way more
> interesting than the title sounds.
>
> I've also had my eye on reproducing the methods used in the paper the video is
> based on for several months. That's sure to give be a solid base for moving
> forward on it. :)
Thanks for the tip. I'll check it out. I have watched his videos before... And
even used his manim to create some nice effects in my videos.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Cousin Ricky <ric### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> On 2026-03-20 19:21 (-4), Bald Eagle wrote:
> >
> > Post something. It doesn't matter what it is.
> > Really. Just post it. Here.
>
> Funny you should mention. I was just at a stopping point with this
> experiment for improving my light bleeding code.
This looks very interesting, the dashed line looks like something that could be
diverted for a lot of Non Photo Real effects ! But that streaked star IS also a
very useful work for photoreal looking effects! keep up!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
