CompuServe Thread

#trueSpace utilities

40 messages in this thread
#11462From: Rob BryertonMay 5, 1995 6:37 PM
I have a whole list of ideas for some trueSpace utilities that I'm planning to do, but I thought it would be a great idea to get some feedback from what all of you guys (and gals) are looking for. So, what d' ya' say… lets get a list going here of stuff that would be useful… I'm pretty tired of exploding stuff <VBG> (for now, anyways…) Ideas, anyone? Rob
#11470From: Shane DavisonMay 5, 1995 8:13 PM
> Ideas, anyone? What – mine weren't enough ?? <bg> Rob (and anyone else on the trueSpace mailing list), last night we had a disaster with someone emailing a 2 meg file to the list which was re-distributed to everyone and included in the digest mailing. I'm attempting to set something up so this doesn't happen again. Sorry for any problems this caused. – Shane.
#11477From: Dennis WienerMay 5, 1995 10:46 PM
Rob I don't know about 2.0, but 1.0x doesn't handle the input of text very well. I purchased TS to add animated graphics & titles to video. When entering more than one line of text I have to manually move them to get them aligned on all axis. How about a utility that can take text and export it to TS as a single object?
#11485From: Terry Cotant[RSS]May 5, 1995 11:29 PM
trueSpace2 will be a bit better at that..
#11574From: Rob BryertonMay 7, 1995 11:19 AM
See Terry's reply… Another idea would be to enter your text in another program, say, Corel (cringe), export as DXF, then load into tS. Seems like that would be the best way to go for entering relatively large amounts of formatted text into _any_ 3D app… Rob
#11579From: Dennis WienerMay 7, 1995 11:39 AM
Rob I just noticed something odd as well (bug maybe). I did a five second fly through (by) of text positioned on an even plane. This was done by moving the camera along a single plane. On the last text object, as the camera approached the letter S, the rendering of the front surface seemed to move to the back, with the sides coming to the foreground – sort of a looking into a tunnel kind of effect, then came back to normal as the camera continued moving through. I realize this might just be an optical illusion related to 3D on a 2D plane, but it's real annoying. What could I do to cure this?
#11604From: Rob BryertonMay 7, 1995 6:59 PM
>>unnel kind of effect, then came back to normal as the camera continued moving through. I realize this might just be an optical illusion related to 3D on a 2D plane, but it's real annoying. What could I do to cure this?<< ZIP up a binary COB, and email it to me. Or send the scene. I'll check it out. Rob
#11648From: Dennis WienerMay 8, 1995 8:53 AM
If you like I'll zip up the 2 tga files, the one where the image is normal, and the next one where the tunnel effect occurs. It happens for two frames and then renders normal after that. I could also zip up the .cob of the object, but it's just text extruded once. What I think might be happening is that the movement of the camera is physically trying to pass through the lettering at the point this happens.
#11483From: Terry Cotant[RSS]May 5, 1995 11:29 PM
Man, I told you before — I want to *melt* stuff now!! <g> After that, I'd say true 3D morphing of objects would be very cool.. (You know, turn a Camaro into a space ship, etc.. Can't you imagine doing that and having the camera above it and circle it with a look-at turned on?
#11507From: Shane DavisonMay 6, 1995 5:51 AM
>> Man, I told you before — I want to *melt* stuff now!! <g> After that, I'd say true 3D morphing of objects would be very cool.. (You know, turn a Camaro into a space ship, etc.. Can't you imagine doing that and having the camera above it and circle it with a look-at turned on? << There you go Rob – another vote for object morphing <g>. What I was thinking is a utility that loads the start and end objects and creates an object that looks very close to the start object and transforms itself into something that looks similar to the end object. This could be accomplished via vertex movement or deformation lattice(s). Btw Rob (still reading, Terry?), I sent you a multiple-part text file a while ago that had an index at the top with the word morph mentioned a few times (that's the title of the program). But actually, the program "melts" objects !! It's even written in C++. However, the objects it imports and exports are Imagine objects but this shouldn't be a problem to convert to COB. Let me know if you need me to re-send it. – Shane.
#11575From: Rob BryertonMay 7, 1995 11:20 AM
>> morph mentioned a few times (that's the title of the program). But actually, the program "melts" objects !! It's even written in C++.<< C++ ? gimme, gimme, gimme <bg> Rob
#11578From: Rob BryertonMay 7, 1995 11:32 AM
re: object morphing >> This could be accomplished via vertex movement or deformation lattice(s).<< Can you accomplish animated vetex movement in 2.0? I don't think so; I'll have to try…. hold on… Nope… can't do it Deformations? Do a _simple_ animated deformation on a sphere, save it to an ASCII file, and read it… I'll pass on that one! See my reply to Terry Rob
#11573From: Rob BryertonMay 7, 1995 11:17 AM
>> Man, I told you before — I want to *melt* stuff now!! << Man, this guy's dangerous; not only does he want to blow things up, now he wants to melt them down <g> Seriously though, I think I'll wait 'till 2.0 is released, as the deformations are not compatible at the file level (I don't think you can load 1.0 animated deformations into 2.0)… Pretty scary looking chunks, those deformations are Melt _is_ on 'the list', though… Rob
#11757From: Terry Cotant[RSS]May 9, 1995 3:28 PM
Rob, please talk to me e-mail about tS2 and "1.x FFD's".. Glad to see that you're still keeping busy.. <VBG>
#11577From: Rob BryertonMay 7, 1995 11:28 AM
>>, I'd say true 3D morphing of objects would be very cool..<< In order to do 3D morphing, you need direct access to each of the objects vertices. You then would have to interpolate the position of each vertice between the models… I think this would be possible in the _current_ implementation of tS, but you would have to break the object into tons of separate objects, each representing a face of the original. Uncool, unless you like faceted objects… Or, you could take the start & end models, and create 28 additional models (for a 30 frame morph), and swap them into & out of the camera view for each frame, but that would make your scenes pretty huge… Still, I think that would do it… Or…. wait till tS has an open API, and do it 'right'…. (I'll take #3 <vbg>) Rob
#11528From: Randy HoppeMay 6, 1995 2:31 PM
Rob, Howzabout exporting .cob to VRML? Randy
#11581From: Rob BryertonMay 7, 1995 11:43 AM
>> Howzabout exporting .cob to VRML? << Is there a spec on this format somewhere? Rob
#11588From: Randy HoppeMay 7, 1995 12:28 PM
<<Is there a spec on this format somewhere? >> There's some stuff on the Silicon Graphics Web Site. Apparently, the VRML folk opted to base it on SGI's Open Inventor. Someone's just posted something called a parser, too. I think there's a site called www.eit.com that has some VRML stuff, too. Randy
#11594From: Randy HoppeMay 7, 1995 2:40 PM
I found these, http://www.eit.com/vrml/vrmlspec.html http://www.arc.org/vrml/vrml_hotlist.html http://www.sgi.com/Products/WebFORCE/WebSpace/WebSpaceFAQ.html Randy
#11603From: Rob BryertonMay 7, 1995 6:58 PM
>>I found these,………….<< I'll check it out. Thanks, Rob
#11532From: Kenneth M. RiegerMay 6, 1995 5:19 PM
Add my vote for the morphing utility! Ummm…..-yes, melting would be handy, as well as particle animation. A note on text: I haven't used the text feature at all in tS, since I only have Adobe type 1 fonts on my system. I make up all my text in CorelDraw and export it as DXF to use in tS. This is the easiest way to get the letter and word spacing correct (doing it in Corel). I HATE it when I see 3D lettering that totally ignores proper letter kerning and word spacing-it looks very unprofessional! BTW Rob, Exploder seems to have a problem with objects having holes in them (speaking of type). I tried exploding a word, but Exploder seems to fill in the holes in letters (like A and O). Has anyone else had this problem? Another request for Exploder (besides gravity) is that the program break the object into solid "chunks" rather than just flat surfaces. It's a great little program, Rob, but the letters fix and the chunks addition would make it even more useful! A wave generator would be a cool program! Taking a flat surface and animating a ripple (or ripples-the number being user-defined) from one end to the other would be a great effect. You could also add concentric ripples to simulate the ones produced when a drop falls in a liquid. Come to think of it, a "splash" effect would also be a useful addition to this app! …Ken
#11544From: CaligariMay 6, 1995 5:58 PM
Do you think AI, EPS or PS import might help you out with bringing in text?
#11662From: Kenneth M. RiegerMay 8, 1995 12:25 PM
|->Do you think AI, EPS or PS import might help you out with bringing in text?<-| Yes-the more import/export capabilities the better! Type is no problem, since importing DXF's is all I need (right now) to get type from CorelDraw to tS. The biggest problem I have right now is being able to exchange object files with a client using POV. The problem of incompatible object formats accross 3D platforms seems to be one that a lot of people are suffering with right now. In order for me to work with some of the potential clients I contact, I'd have to buy every 3D program out there. A little out of my budget! <g>. I really enjoy working in tS, and don't really want to purchase any other 3D software (especially since ver2 will add the desperately-needed boolean operations), so adding more export/import capabilities would be a tremendous help. …Ken
#11580From: Rob BryertonMay 7, 1995 11:42 AM
>> BTW Rob, Exploder seems to have a problem with objects having holes in them (speaking of type). I tried exploding a word, but Exploder seems to fill in the holes in letters (like A and O) << Hmmm…. though I fixed that… Email me a _simple_ .cob and I'll check it out… Are you using the latest rev (1.36) of Exploder? >>Another request for Exploder (besides gravity) is that the program break the object into solid "chunks" rather than just flat surfaces<< If you're using 1.36, try loading a bunch of solid 'chunk' objects as particles, starting at the imported object center. Scale the imported object to 0.0001 quickly, so it disappears in a few frames, and I think that will give you the effect that you're looking for. Or, you could just forget the scaling part… Come to think about it, that would probably look better. Also, vary the size of the paricles using the Random Scale setting on the Gravity & Particles page of the Options dialog… >>A wave generator would be a cool program! Taking a flat surface and animating a ripple (or ripples-the number being user-defined) from one end to the other would be a great effect.<< This presents the same problem as morphing (see previous replies on this thread), though it is on 'The List'… I have wanted to do this in tS for a long time myself. Today, I'm going to try to fake it using tS 2.0 features… Just had an idea. Thanks for the input, Rob
#11652From: Kenneth M. RiegerMay 8, 1995 9:31 AM
|->Are you using the latest rev (1.36) of Exploder?<-| Just checked, and I seem to be using ver1.01-time for a download! I'll check out the holes-in-letters in the latest version, and let you know! Looks like I'll have to check out the other features you added as well. I was thinking a bit more about the wave generator-I think that in 2.0 you should be able to make small linear waves using the texture animation feature. Instead of making the waves in the object itself, you could make a wave bumpmap and animate it along a surface. Concentric waves would be a bit more difficult. …Ken
#11660From: Rob BryertonMay 8, 1995 12:21 PM
>>1.01-time for a download! I'll check out the holes-in-letters in the latest version, and let you know! Looks like I'll have to check out the other features you added as well.<< Get 1.36 right away! I has _TONS_ of cool new stuff! >> Instead of making the waves in the object itself, you could make a wave bumpmap and animate it along a surface. Concentric waves would be a bit more difficult. << Agreed. Actually, I made a few tga's to use as bumpmaps, then morphed between them using ER, but tS 2.0 would'nt load the AVI… I'm using Windows 95, so maybe that's why… Rob
#11848From: Terry Cotant[RSS]May 10, 1995 10:33 PM
There you go again, talking beta this, beta that.. <g>
#11925From: Kenneth M. RiegerMay 12, 1995 1:27 AM
|->There you go again, talking beta this, beta that.. <g> <-| Yeah, it usually helps to have the programs YOU'RE testing things out on Rob! <g>. I'll be upgrading to tS2 when it comes out, but I'll hold off on downgrading to Winever as long as possible. Rob, I dl'd you're new version of Exploder-looks great! Haven't had a chance to check out the particles yet, but the problems I had with lettering are fixed. HOWEVER <G>, when I try to explode a word, it looks like it's exploding at the ends rather than from the middle of the text. Is this because it's a hierarchy object? It looks weird in an animation-almost like the word is imploding and then exploding. Interesting effect, but not quite what I had in mind! …Ken
#11929From: Rob BryertonMay 12, 1995 6:34 AM
>> I'll be upgrading to tS2 when it comes out, but I'll hold off on downgrading to Winever as long as possible.<< If you're referring to Windows95, this is a _must have_ upgrade. Whatever you've heard, let me tell you that it is nothing less than _AWESOME_. For the timid, you can always 'dual boot', but I'm telling ya', once you use '95, 3.11 will look (and feel) like a crusty old antique! No comparison, IMHO. >>when I try to explode a word, it looks like it's exploding at the ends rather than from the middle of the text. Is this because it's a hierarchy object?<< Exploder will only work on single objects (currently), so the Hierarchy is a non-issue in you situation. The reason that the 'explosion' looks like it does in your example is because Exploder 1.36 takes into account the location of the objects axis… This is not documented because it really doesn't work correctly yet… You will get funky looking results if the axis is off center relative to the object… If you move the axis below the object, the object _should_ explode upwards, but as I mentioned, it's not fully functional… Hope this helps, Rob
#11983From: Kenneth M. RiegerMay 13, 1995 12:21 AM
|-> The reason that the 'explosion' looks like it does in your example is because Exploder 1.36 takes into account the location of the objects axis… This is not documented because it really doesn't work correctly yet… You will get funky looking results if the axis is off center relative to the object..<-| Hmmm…..I checked, and the axis of the text is dead center. I guess I'm getting a weird result because "it doesn't work correctly yet" <g>. Guess I'll have to wait 'til ver1.37! The strange way that the word I'm using explodes was really evident when I checke the wireframe animation from the top view. The ends of the word were exploding first (front and backwards), and the pieces moved towards the middle of the word, The pieces passed each other, and then went flying off in the other direction! I guess you can leave that in 1.37 as an "undocumented feature". <g> Great program Rob-keep 'em coming! …Ken
#11996From: Rob BryertonMay 13, 1995 11:18 AM
>>The ends of the word were exploding first (front and backwards), and the pieces moved towards the middle of the word, The pieces passed each other, and then went flying off in the other direction!<<\ Ooops! When you have Exploder process an object that is off center (not at 0,0,0), or its' axis is off center, or it has holes, things _could_ get weird (as you have noticed <g>)… I suspect it has something to do with the hole code in Exploder, as I _really_ did'nt spend much time there. Holes need to be handled (and written) in a certain fashion, as tS expects them to be arranged in a certain way within the object relative to their bordering 'solid' polygonal faces. >> I guess you can leave that in 1.37 as an "undocumented feature". <g> << Yeah, it could be the Exploder 1.37 Preview Program <VBG>. Looks like MS started something big…notice how people are paying companies to beta for them via so called preview programs? Kind of a scary trend, but then again it's cool (sometimes) to be on the 'bleeding edge'. So far Symantec and NewTek are doing the old pre release ala Win95; I curious to see who does it next. Thanks for reporting this behavior; I'll try to have it fixed for Exploder 2.0… >>Great program Rob-keep 'em coming!<< Thanks for the compliment, and, believe me, Exploder is just the tip of the iceberg (tease, tease) <g> See ya later, Rob
#11847From: Terry Cotant[RSS]May 10, 1995 10:30 PM
The issue with letters filling in that have holes has been fixed in 1.36a. Are you current? You should be able to do the ripple thing in trueSpace2 using animated deformations, and/or 2D plugins..
#11672From: Michael D. LallemonMay 8, 1995 4:18 PM
Rob, I just want to says thanks for writing exploder! I will be sending you the money to register soon. I am excited about what else you might have up your sleeve too…Caligari should hire you and pay you well!!! Here's some suggestions: Something like bones pro for 3DS (I am a programmer, I know this would be hard) Particles like rain, snow, flowing water. Next version of exploder: Make all the peices lay flat when they reach the floor if you are using gravity. Thanks again dude, Michael Lallemont PS. Man, I really love finding things to blow up!
#11680From: Rob BryertonMay 8, 1995 6:49 PM
Thanks for checking out Exploder. >>Man, I really love finding things to blow up!<< >>Something like bones pro for 3DS (I am a programmer, I know this would be hard)<< IK? I 'talked' to someone who _may_ be working on something like this. Interesting idea, though. Hmmm…. >>Particles like rain, snow, flowing water.<< Got rain and snow in the works right now! Also a terrain generator…. >>Next version of exploder: Make all the peices lay flat when they reach the floor if you are using gravity. << Yeah, I agree. I'm really not happy with the curent ground detection/rebound, but I wanted to release it, as I was kinda frustrated at the time, plus I couldn't stop adding stuff <g>. Later, Rob
#11947From: Robert KingMay 12, 1995 1:00 PM
What about smoke, fire-flames, page-turning etc. Robert King
#11948From: Terry Cotant[RSS]May 12, 1995 1:02 PM
All nice 2D effects, that can (or will soon) be found in Photo-shop style plug- ins.. Not really 3D stuff usually.
#11984From: Kenneth M. RiegerMay 13, 1995 12:21 AM
|->All nice 2D effects, that can (or will soon) be found in Photo-shop style plug- ins.. Not really 3D stuff usually.<-| Terry, are these plug-ins being planned by Caligari or will they be third-party? …Ken
#12070From: Terry Cotant[RSS]May 15, 1995 3:25 PM
They would be 3rd party..
#11951From: Rob BryertonMay 12, 1995 1:46 PM
>>What about smoke, fire-flames<< As Terry stated: "All nice 2D effects, that can (or will soon) be found in Photo-shop style plug- ins.. Not really 3D stuff usually." However, it can also be accomplished with 3D particle systems. Actually, I _was_ thinking about smoke. The only problem with the file-based (as opposed to API based) particle implementation in a 3D rendering system is that the scenes get _very_ large _very_ fast. For example, I'm working on a snow/rain particle system at the moment, and to get a nice 'looping' snowstorm effect over a 12 x 12 x 12 unit area took about 2-3k polygons. That was a very basic and preliminary test, but you get the idea, right? Anyways, the effects you mentioned are 'do-able', and I'll really consider the smoke… Great suggestions. Thanks for your input! Rob
#12126From: Terry Cotant[RSS]May 16, 1995 1:25 PM
Rob, To do smoke, couldn't you do that ol' "Thin 2D object with a partially transparent texture" trick? (ala the standard "tree" that's actually several thin cubes with a texture of a tree on it and the "background" is transparent" — this makes shadows and is a gimick.) Maybe just do it with an animated texture map that's semi transparent, and possibly do several of them rotated at certain levels, depending on if you're looking for a "cigarrette" smoke, or a building burning down kind of effect.. I dunno.. These just popped up while reading the message.. Anyway..