 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This thread got moved from povray.programming
subject: "German developers group available"
Hi,
There is a little project on my mind:
I would like to write a program that is able to convert any datas to
something perceptible. Sounds/light/objects to symbols, curves,
frequenzes of light, or sounds. Any combination shall be set in a
config file or with a GUI, or HTML-form later.
I would appreciate it a lot if some of you guys would like to take
part of my brainstorming, specially if you could speak German with me,
sorry. If they understand natural science a bit (it is my hobby only)
it would be much easier for all of us. We philosophy first, I hope you
dont mind.
If there are other project or applications which tried it already I
would like to get some links about it, or even some words for my
google. Even theoretical work or articles about it could be of use.
For the first - thanks a lot to all of you.
Sincerely yours
Fred Rathke
ComRat - Communication Rational
60316 Frankfurt
Germany
news:o001au8uje5dcdqfrl9sbntblrkrbpvkph@4ax.com...
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 14:58:52 +0100, "Fred Rathke" <com### [at] hotmail com>
wrote:
> I would like to write a program that is able to convert any datas to
> something perceptible. Sounds/light/objects to symbols, curves,
> frequenzes of light, or sounds.
It sounds too general for me. Or I don't understand this idea.
Why you are writing about it here, in POV related server. Do you plan
to write
it in SDL. Such a difficoult task should be rather done in more
efficient
language/programming tool. Or do you plan POV export ?
(btw. this is binary group, programming discuusion should be rather
placed in
povray.programming group - corrected in followup-to)
ABX
"Fred Rathke" <com### [at] hotmailcom> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3ca08d36$1@news.povray.org...
Hi, Sorry if I should have been OT. I think I am still in the
right NG, because it could be of interest for some of the programers
in here, too.
If hope PovRay is able to work automatically when some scripts run. So
the simulation that will deliver the datas will feed PovRay and PovRay
will generate the pictures. All this will be put online automatically
in the format: video, and/or HTML animated gifs or VRML(?) or or or
... - The view of the virtual eyes in the simulation can be set on the
internet by anybody...
Doesnt all this sound like programer's stuff? :-)
SDL and POV export I dont know, sorry.
--
Sincerely yours
Fred Rathke
ComRat - Communication Rational
60316 Frankfurt
Germany
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3ca08f72$1@news.povray.org>,
"Fred Rathke" <com### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> There is a little project on my mind:
> I would like to write a program that is able to convert any datas to
> something perceptible. Sounds/light/objects to symbols, curves,
> frequenzes of light, or sounds. Any combination shall be set in a
> config file or with a GUI, or HTML-form later.
I'm not sure what you really want...those things are already
perceivable. Or do you want to convert them all into something that can
be perceived with one sense? Like converting vision or touch to sound or
sound to visual imagery? I think this would only make sense in
real-time, maybe you should check out things like OpenGL instead. If you
are simulating an environment, you might be able to do something with
the Crystal Space game engine.
BTW, please don't "top post"...between the end of your post and the
beginning of your signature, there are two other complete messages. When
you are replying, quote only the part you are replying to and write your
reply below it.
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi Christopher James,
(TAG= Technical Assistance Group wow)
thanks for your answer and your advice :-( *grrr Sorry I had to move
the whole thread because it's content changed so much, that it run OT.
And I didnt want anybody to read three messages in separated files
first ... sorry
You said: "...those things are already perceivable."
Do you have some samples, or names of applications, or some words for
my google? I would appreciate a lot.
You said: "Or do you want to convert them all into something that can
be perceived with one sense?"
If neccessary, I will have to do this too. But any convertion should
be possible.
For me everything is energie. So everything, humans call signals, much
be energie with a frequence. This is physic, I know ;-) If I am right,
then it could be easy to move the non-perceivable frequenz to any
perceivable spectrum, and it can not matter if this is a frequenz we
see, feel or hear, right? This is physic, I know :-)
So if there is somebody who knows any theoretical work about this
problem or any application ... _please_ let me know.
You say: "Like converting vision or touch to sound or sound to visual
imagery? I think this would only make sense in
real-time, ..."
I will think about this. But the mass of datas I guess I will have
will push me to queue it and put it into samples that can be viewed
like videos, animated gifs or so...
About the "Crystal Space game engine" I will go on reading now ...
Thanks for your time and all your helpful suggestions.
--
Sincerely yours
Fred Rathke
ComRat - Communication Rational
60316 Frankfurt
Germany
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3ca0b2f7$1@news.povray.org>,
"Fred Rathke" <com### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> You said: "...those things are already perceivable."
>
> Do you have some samples, or names of applications, or some words for
> my google? I would appreciate a lot.
Well, I generally use my eyes, ears, etc... ;-)
You seem to have some interesting ideas, though I'm still not really
sure what you want to do. You seem to want to extend human senses to
ranges outside what we normally perceive, not translate from one sense
to another...but is the source of this data synthesized (a
computer-generated environment) or coming from real-world sensors?
POV would only have any application to the visual portion, and it
wouldn't be useful for simulating vision in other portions of the
spectrum. POV-Ray (and most pieces of graphics software) are designed to
make results that look realistic using RGB representation of color. It
would have to be modified heavily to use spectral color (color
represented by wavelength), and you would have to do a lot of work and
take lots of measurements to get realistic textures for the different
parts of the spectrum. You would probably need to simulate florescence
as well, and things like absorption and emission of heat, and effects
like diffraction that are caused by the wave nature of light would be a
lot more important at the longer wavelengths. And you would still need
data from real world sensors to make sure the simulation is correct.
Translating things like roughness, hardness, etc to surface color would
be a lot easier.
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christopher James Huff wrote:
>
> [povray] would have to be modified heavily to use spectral color
How about just assigning the spectral sample frequencies to RGB
channels in multiple pov & output image files. Then combine the
full spectrum from multiple image files and calculate RGB values.
When I have nothing else to do I'll try that :) Povray animation
loop and Matlab script will do the extra job nicely. The problem
is the multiplied render time.
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3CA1AF06.2AD8C723@luxlab.com>,
Kari Kivisalo <pro### [at] luxlabcom> wrote:
> How about just assigning the spectral sample frequencies to RGB
> channels in multiple pov & output image files. Then combine the
> full spectrum from multiple image files and calculate RGB values.
> When I have nothing else to do I'll try that :) Povray animation
> loop and Matlab script will do the extra job nicely. The problem
> is the multiplied render time.
Interesting idea. Slower, but interesting.
You would still have to take the very different surface properties into
account...for example, the grating in the front of a microwave oven is
opaque to microwaves. Common glass transmits ultraviolet fairly badly.
Objects of different temperatures radiate different amounts and
wavelengths of infrared...surface temperature seems to overpower diffuse
reflection, you will have to simulate absorption and heating for
realistic infrared. Almost anything is nearly transparent to gamma rays.
Fluorescence (absorption and re-emission at a different wavelength)
often has effects within the visible spectrum, but will be much more
important with a wider spectrum. With the longer wavelengths,
interference effects will be much more visible at ordinary scales. You
can get away with ignoring these effects in the visible range and
higher, but I think they would become very important once you get into
the microwave range, or maybe even long infrared.
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in news:chr### [at] netplexaussieorg Christopher
James Huff wrote:
> Objects of different temperatures radiate different amounts and
> wavelengths of infrared...surface temperature seems to overpower
> diffuse reflection, you will have to simulate absorption and heating
> for realistic infrared.
Don't forget the emission coefficients, different materials at the same
temperature radiate different amounts of energy per square whatever.
Ingo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christopher James Huff wrote:
>
> > How about just assigning the spectral sample frequencies to RGB
> > channels
This, of course, in visible spectrum. OT really but just wanted
to point out it can be done with vanilla POV. Just in case someone
has the urge to write 24 component colors :)
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I try to do what everybody does. Since we are a technical civilisation
we convert signals. Sounds get recorded. We found out that the color
of a picture is a frequenz of light. Material and energy seems to be
the same.
We found out that other frequences are easier to transport. Voice get
changed to a radio signal and back to a voice. The voice effects our
ears and gets changed to - no, it starts a electronical signal to our
brain. This brain seems to make the picture. And so on, and so on ...
When we will start traveling in space (very soon may be) we have to
able to feel the wind of the sun, to feel the pain of gamma ray and to
feel the form of magnetic fields. *talking in pictures, sorry*
Since some time we are able to listen to the sound of a batman, an
earthquake and even a cell, the symbol of live. We build machines for
everything that could made perceptible.
So why not generate pictures of anything around us. We know there are
many things we dont need to percept, like our own heardbeat or our
breathing.
If you would make sound visible in the air, how it needs to look like?
What would be real. Sound is a mechanical wave. Transportet by the
collisions of atoms in the air. If you would make air a little bit
visible and put an algorithm in the setting of the atoms of the air
you could put them closer to each other and in the other area not so
close. A wave could be seen.
... There are much more ideas on my mind. Need to hear more? But then
we should work on it, or not? :-)
Thanks for your time and listening to me. Some things I think about
could sound a bit weird, but ... I dont mind about my thoughts. I
believe everything is worth to think about. Nothing is fixed. It is
all evolving. So why not our thinking and our views, too? :-)
--
Sincerely yours
Fred Rathke
ComRat - Communication Rational
60316 Frankfurt
Germany
"Christopher James Huff" <chr### [at] maccom> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:chr### [at] netplexaussieorg...
In article <3ca0b2f7$1@news.povray.org>,
"Fred Rathke" <com### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> You said: "...those things are already perceivable."
>
> Do you have some samples, or names of applications, or some words
for
> my google? I would appreciate a lot.
Well, I generally use my eyes, ears, etc... ;-)
You seem to have some interesting ideas, though I'm still not really
sure what you want to do. You seem to want to extend human senses to
ranges outside what we normally perceive, not translate from one sense
to another...but is the source of this data synthesized (a
computer-generated environment) or coming from real-world sensors?
POV would only have any application to the visual portion, and it
wouldn't be useful for simulating vision in other portions of the
spectrum. POV-Ray (and most pieces of graphics software) are designed
to
make results that look realistic using RGB representation of color. It
would have to be modified heavily to use spectral color (color
represented by wavelength), and you would have to do a lot of work and
take lots of measurements to get realistic textures for the different
parts of the spectrum. You would probably need to simulate florescence
as well, and things like absorption and emission of heat, and effects
like diffraction that are caused by the wave nature of light would be
a
lot more important at the longer wavelengths. And you would still need
data from real world sensors to make sure the simulation is correct.
Translating things like roughness, hardness, etc to surface color
would
be a lot easier.
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
