CompuServe Thread

#Sparks

43 messages in this thread
#84520From: Joel ProvostJun 15, 1994 4:53 PM
Can anyone give me an idea how good the Sparks front end for light wave is? I'm considering something like that, but haven't seen too much about it. I am curious about how easy is it to use? Does it get cumbersome when you have a large number of particles? 10, 100, 1000 ? Does it create motion paths, or what trick does it use to animate the particles? Any info would be helpful Thanks – Joel
#84554From: Erik FlomJun 16, 1994 12:38 AM
Currently, LW seems to be limited to about 400 objects, each particle is a seperate object. The interface is somewhat limited, but I would recommend trying to contact the developer directly. Macrosystems is no longer distributing his product. Can't find the number right now, but Adib Nasle is supposed to be one of his 'buds'. Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom – ELF Works 3D Construction Co.
#84813From: Charles D SteinkuehlerJun 21, 1994 8:58 AM
Eric, As a neutral voice in terms of speed claims, and someone familiar with the raptor (I built the Screamer prototype unvailed at SigGraph) I would like to make the following points on speed: The speed increase seen will depend HEAVILY on the scene content. The raptor can be slower than the amiga, due to fixed overhead, but only for very easy scenes. For example, a scene that renders in 20 seconds on an Amiga might render in 1 or 2 seconds on a raptor, but include 60 seconds or more of file transfer. The processers doing the rendering are fundamentaly different (040 vs r4400). This is IMPORTANT to speed claims. The big advantage of the 4400 (other than generally being faster) is its pipelined FPU. The 040 as you may recall has a limited FPU and requires software libraries to do most of the higher functions (sin, tan, etc..) while the R4400 does all this in hardware. This means that for certian types of images that are FPU intensive (it also helps if most of the rendering code fits in the cache of the 4400). I did most of my work with these things using two processors of the older (and slower) deskstation machines. Results varied from perceptually quite a bit faster to way,way,way faster, as long as the scene was sufficiently complex (i.e. more than a few min rendering time). Based on my experience, the 10x stock amiga 4000-040 is the 'typical' number. Very few things will go any slower than this at all, and certian classes of scenes will go MUCH faster. All of this indicates it is very difficult to determine reletive speed between architecurally different machines, even if they are running the same application. To wrap up, from everyone I know doing 3D graphics for $, the Raptor is a very effective, revenue enhancing tool. You certianly don't have to buy one (it is a free country). Deskstation, however, does seem to make the fastest R4400 based NT machines around, and as I understand, does a good job of installing the ScreamerNet software and making things work out of the box (not a trivial task with an NT machine, as I know). Charles
#85050From: Erik FlomJun 24, 1994 9:53 PM
Charles: Thanks much for the even-handed and lucid explanation of the variation in rendering times. I had expected things like this to crop up, given the 'minor' differences between the 040 & R4400, and I'm _VERY_ curious to know "just how fast it'll go." Like Tony D. Tracer says "Any rendering time >0 needs acceleration." :^) I remember running into performance problems because of the limited FPU in the 040, and am not surprised that the R4400 can do transcendentals mucho faster. You also mention the cache size of the 4400, again another important performance booster. Now, if this was the sort of argument I had received initially – as opposed to a highly emotional, personal attack reminiscent of being on a playground – things would have ended up much more amicably. As you and others have pointed out, the Raptor is the 'only thing out there' right now, and if a time should come when I truly need the speed, I'll put on my black trench coat and go out and buy one under a pseudonym. <g> Until then, I'll keep on asking questions. Thanks again. This was the exact sort of realworld/technical explanation I was looking for. Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom – ELF Works 3D Construction Co.
#85166From: Charles D SteinkuehlerJun 26, 1994 10:47 PM
Have noticed the "any render time >0 needs acceleration" before. This is a rather impossible goal. If you said however, "any render time > effective frame rate needs acceleration" you might eventually get your wish. Real time rendering/ray tracing video resolution images in real time (1/60 sec to calculate 4.2 MHz video screen) is doable today with alternative archetecure processers (i.e. wierd supercomputer that is hard to program, but kicks butt on vectorized ray trace calculations). The hardware for such a machine could even be rather inexpensive (like < 50K) in low production quantities. The problem is amortizing the design cost of such a beast if you wern't going to sell as many as something like a Pentium. Anyway, now that you're all excited, sit back down, because even 'tho it's possible today, you probably won't see anything neat for 5 to 10 years, as the market gradually gets big enough to become 'interesting' to those with enough $$ (and know how) to make such things. In the short term remember you've already got the power of a couple of early Cray's lying around. Now if only you could get your hands on some of the processing power they have online at the NSA……
#85176From: Erik FlomJun 27, 1994 1:40 AM
The comment about 'rendering time >0' needing 'acceleration' is a signature tag of one of the guys who frequents this forum. While your reinterpretation of the addage to say '> effective frame rate' is _indeed_ more accurate, I believe he is speaking for those of us that _still_ wouldn't be satisfied……Currently, the frame rate of VR rides is upto 60-80 fps using film. We wouldn't need 'motion blur' as an option if the frame rate was upto 100fps….:^) And once the question of frame rate is licked, I for one would like to see them tackle the problem of producing a truly 'holographic' display not requiring glasses. Then there's the question of tactile feedback, holographic audio, temperature, and smell…. Anyway, suffice to say that I won't get 'all excited' if you tell me 'gee-whiz' stuff like I've "got the power of a couple of early Cray's lying around." I'm aware of that, and now (thanks to modern culture), I WANT MORE!! <G> Anyway, I'm looking forward to hearing what Deskstation has to say at SIGGRAPH. I wish them the best of luck. Thanks again for supplying us with some information about the Raptor.. Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom – ELF Works 3D Construction Co.
#85182From: jeff HolinskiJun 27, 1994 3:31 AM
Eric, All the talk about high speed VR systems reminds me about the magazine article they had a few years back of a prototype AR headset. The specs included: stereoscopic 24 bit color with realtime response, automatic motion blur, automatic collision detection, object interaction, gravity, wind, atmospheric effects (fog, rain snow), radiosity type lighting, better than CD quality sound, and much, much more. One of the big drawbacks was that the editor was hard to use. Of course, the AR headset didn't have much built in processing power since it's only job was to look cool. By the way, AR stands for Actual Reality. ;^) (over 5 billion users daily) Jeff H…
#85246From: Erik FlomJun 28, 1994 2:08 AM
:^) Aww man, REAL life sucks…Give me a VIRTUAL life where I can be a GOD!!! (Now, that should be good for a few trips to the psychiatrist. )>: AR _is_ cheaper, but it's the user interface that takes some getting used to…..(Where's the FIRE button? :^) Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom – ELF Works 3D Construction Co.
#85415From: Wayne ColeJun 30, 1994 2:26 AM
Erik, But you ARE God – you just don't KNOW it yet. :^} wmc – via Autopilot!
#85341From: Charles D SteinkuehlerJun 29, 1994 8:27 AM
Make you a deal. You provide the direct link to the cerebral cortex, I'll whip up the machine to pipe in the data. In the real world 🙁 I know deskstation has been speeding up their machines, using the newer/faster/lower voltage MIPS chips. I don't know what their latest/greatest is, but I would expect to see improvements out of the MIPS/deskstation camp closely pacing events in mainstream x86 land (i.e. apx 2x the power each 18 months). My previous message was intended to forshadow events unfolding in the next five years or so, as the current systems hit the limit of improvement in terms of clock rate/bit width/piplining and radically different approaches are used to improve speed. From what I hear the P7 project is a drastic departure from 'conventional' processers, while being code compatible. The huge leaps being made in hard drives this year and next (soon there will be no drive < 1GB or slower than 4 MB/s) will hit processors in 3 to 5 years. In the meantime a Raptor is I believe the most cost effective rendering machine ever available to the general public (or anyone for that matter).
#85386From: Joe lasenJun 29, 1994 9:27 PM
In terms of Gee whiz stuff, Some of the best stuff I have seen recently is the tracking of human models, wired to Onyx, that allows for real time caricature movement of a Shaded 3-D Object. Soon, imagine rendering complex 3-D creatures and producing naturalistic motions by allowing a dancer/actor to input movement in real time. Prehaps the son of the Raptor, (the Brontosauraus), will allow realtime throughput for a variety of uses…simulations, games, Special Effects. What better input for motion can you have than the real thing? Great article in New Media this month…"Hollywood Production Digital Style" Put the biz in great perspective. Amiga/Toaster touted as the Can Do machine. GREAT Pic of Conti's new series Hercules with an Aqua-Nymph. The concepts about real time motion capture are explained well,too. Joe Clasen Joe's DB&G
#85438From: Erik FlomJun 30, 1994 12:43 PM
Yeah, some of the real-time rendering stuff on those high end machines is pretty awesome. The ability to use digitized motion paths from live actors makes a world of difference when trying to do character animation. One company that offers digitizing services would even offer output in LW format – for only $7000/day, with a 2 day minimum! Did you ever see the 'rapping' velociraptor animation someone showed at a japanese graphics show? It was pretty cool! (I'll have to read that issue of NewMedia…so many things, so little time. :^) Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom – ELF Works 3D Construction Co.
#85558From: Joe lasenJul 2, 1994 1:15 AM
At Universal Studio in L.A., next to the Studio where Seaquest is taped, ran a Jurrasic Park display. One display was a Dinosaur dancing in real time from input from a volunteer. Probably the same system. I particlarly like the way the jumps were tracked. Sythetic actors are on the verge of becoming a reality. ( This doesn't include the Captain of Babylon 5.) Joe Clasen Joe's DB&G
#85695From: Erik FlomJul 3, 1994 9:05 PM
'Synthetic actors are on the verge of becoming reality. (This doesn't include the Captain of Babylon 5.)' <VBG> …But, I thought he was trying to show how a real person can look like a manequin. :^) Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom – ELF Works 3D Construction Co.
#85445From: Peter GreciJun 30, 1994 3:52 PM
What you are mentioning sounds alot like the WALDO machine for giving 3D "Puppets" life
#85559From: Joe lasenJul 2, 1994 1:15 AM
Simgraphics VACtor system produces a Waldo. Sony Pictures Imageworks has one too. SuperFluo is another. Or you can fake it with the Toaster for a tenth the cost. Depends on how many 0's are in the budget. Joe Clasen Joe's DB&G
#85673From: Peter GreciJul 3, 1994 3:09 PM
😉 I like that. "Depends How many 0's in the Budget" Tho I'm unsure how ya can simulate a WALDO with Lightwave. What're ya using for feedback to the System? The old Mattel Power Glove?
#85914From: Joe lasenJul 6, 1994 8:20 PM
There are elves tinkering away to do just that, but with bigger sights than just a glove. FYI, Newtek and company are going to the L.A. Toaster user group this Sat. in L.A. Lee and others should give a full 2 hour demo of the Flyer and might have a few answers to the burning answers of our time. Like when, in what housing, whose hard drive, and who will provide the SMPTE interface? If they spill the beans, I will tell ya. They said they are going to tape the meeting for a video to be distributed to the dealer Network across the nation. Joe Clasen Joe's DB&G
#85786From: glen millerJul 4, 1994 9:39 PM
But right now, NOTHING looks like it beats the ACCLAM motion capture system. This setup is all optical….no cords, wires, etc. Just get out there, and dance around! GM
#85928From: Doyle CalvertJul 6, 1994 10:52 PM
Hey Glen! How much is the ACCLAM motion capture system? I could use something like that. I'm thinking of building a motion tracking system. The leg's almost healed! Best! –>Doyle Calvert Synergistic MultiMedia
#86032From: Joe lasenJul 8, 1994 10:26 PM
Probably the unit the Grateful Dead use in their shows. Must be nice… Joe Clasen Joe's DB&G
#85862From: John GrossJul 5, 1994 10:25 PM
Out of curiosity (and trivia).. Do you know where the term WALDO comes from? JG
#85872From: jeff HolinskiJul 6, 1994 12:44 AM
John, I'm not sure where the original name comes from, but waldos are what they call those mechanical arms that were originally designed for handling nuclear materials and other hazardous goods. The term's been around since the late 50's. Jeff H…
#86212From: John GrossJul 13, 1994 12:03 AM
They come from a Robert Heinlein story/book called Waldo and Magic, Inc about this large guy named Waldo that used such devices. JG
#85903From: Erik FlomJul 6, 1994 4:34 PM
I believe it was coined by Robert Heinlein in one of his stories way back in the 40s/50s. I vaguely remember they were either developed to aid a handicapped protagonist, or to make very small things…… Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom – ELF Works 3D Construction Co.
#85975From: Peter GreciJul 7, 1994 6:23 PM
I'm uncertain where the Term WALDO originated John. Sorry.
#86043From: glen millerJul 8, 1994 11:11 PM
John, Doesn't Waldo mean a useful device that took forever to develop and wears a red striped shirt? :} I don't know! Call them there folks at SIMGRAPHICS and ask 'em! GM
#86049From: Steve AhlstromJul 9, 1994 3:19 AM
Heinlein — altho I forget the name of the book (wasn't it a short story?) -sja
#86127From: Jim SteeleJul 10, 1994 9:51 PM
"Waldo and Magic, Inc", was the short story if memory serves. I don't remember the plot exactly. Something to do with prosthetic limbs, I think. – Jim
#85610From: Anthony RamirezJul 2, 1994 6:37 PM
>Thanks much for the even-handed and lucid explanation of the variation in >rendering times. … I'm _VERY_ curious to know "just how fast it'll go." >Like Tony D. Tracer says "Any rendering time >0 needs acceleration." :^) Erik, machines will get so fast that they will finish BEFORE you start the project. :^) I will say that my friend was testing the Raptor the local dealer had and there was an acceleration of about 7-11 times for the normal production type rendering. But when he was doing a Ray-Trace anim of a Diamond and rendering times were in the 6-8 hours a frame on a GVP 33/040 but took about 20 mins on the Raptor. So the claims for speed are very dependent on scene content and hopefully this will be at least hinted to in the broucher. I wish I could afford a Raptor the only chance I may have is to lease one, I'll have to look into that. <<< Tony D. Tracer >>> (Any render time >0 needs acceleration.)
#85674From: Peter GreciJul 3, 1994 3:09 PM
Remember Tony, if you make instant Coffee in the Microwave there is a 30% chance you will go back in time due to the extreme quickness the coffee is made.
#85696From: Erik FlomJul 3, 1994 9:06 PM
'…they will finish BEFORE you start the project.' Those computers would be using the new ST:TNG FTL (Faster Than Light) circuits, right? :^) I'm not surprised that certain types of scenes will render faster than others, given the difference in CPU architectures between the Amiga & Raptor. I'll be very curious to see what this rumoured Raptor 2 is all about. If it's the Workstation _I've_ been waiting for, DeskStation may well get some of my money. (Until then, I'm going to be upgrading my 3000 with a 40MHz 040. Know anyone looking to buy a slightly used GVP 28MHz 040 w/2MB RAM for the Amiga 3000? :^) Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom – ELF Works 3D Construction Co.
#85744From: Peter GreciJul 4, 1994 1:38 PM
oh oh pick me pick me……Wish I COULD buy yer 040….Saving for a Engagement Ring/Wedding…..My Spending will be naught for some time now methinks
#85769From: Erik FlomJul 4, 1994 8:59 PM
For _you_, I might consider installment payments. (Sort of my little bit of charity. :^) It would be _ONLY_ around $650.00……… Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom – ELF Works 3D Construction Co.
#85793From: jeff HolinskiJul 4, 1994 11:42 PM
Erik, What sort of accelerator are you selling? I've been thinking of upgrading my 2000. The chances of a Raptor in the near future is starting to look a little dim. Jeff H…
#85830From: Erik FlomJul 5, 1994 12:34 PM
Alas, I'll be selling a GVP A3000-040/28 w/2MB-40ns RAM. It only works in the CPU slot on a 3000/3000T. Sorry. :^( Have you seen the rumours of the 'Raptor 2'? I have no idea what it is, but I'm hoping maybe it'll be the single/double R4600 workstation version? Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom – ELF Works 3D Construction Co.
#85870From: jeff HolinskiJul 5, 1994 11:48 PM
Erik, Just my luck about the accelerator. :^( Haven't heard anything about the new version of the Raptor. Gee, wouldn't it be cool if the market was flooded with original Raptors dirt cheap? After all, they WOULD be obsolete right? ;^) Jeff H…
#85899From: Peter GreciJul 6, 1994 4:06 PM
heheheheheheh Still couldn't afford it unless those installments were about $25 a week. Thanx for the offer tho Erik.
#84596From: Adib NasleJun 16, 1994 8:51 PM
Joel, The Sparks interface for version 1.0 is not very "Lightwavish" and may take a little getting used to. John Tindall, who is the author of the Sparks is just about to release the latest and greatest version of this particle animation program. I have not seen the new interface, but I may see him next Thursday and hopefully I will have some answers for you with regard to the interface. You can call him directly yourself, he is a great guy and will answer any questions you have. contact John Tindall at: MetroGrafx 625 Newton Drive Lake Orion, Michigan 48362 Phone: (810) 693-5134 Also, Erik is correct, MacroSystemsUS is no longer supporting Sparks, so I recommend that you get it directly through John. It has new tutorials, manuals, and a whole host of special effects not available on any platform – including SGI. In fact, John's "real" job is doing animation on high-end SGI machines. Adib
#84644From: John BunnellJun 17, 1994 11:14 PM
Adib, I couldn't get my order canceled from MacroSys and I got Sparks today. What rotten luck.<G> jmb
#84686From: Adib NasleJun 18, 1994 7:13 PM
Well, its not that bad! You can still upgrade to the new version through John Tindall. Don't be put off by the manual you have received with the MacroSystemsUS version. The upgrade has a very intuitive manual and examples which will provide you with a clear understanding of how Sparks works. The manual you have has three examples which really are not that clear to some people, the new manual will have at least seven and an extra disk which has sample scenes for you to load and try out. In fact, one of the reasons the relationship with MacroSystemsUS was terminated, was because of the lousy job they did on the manual, no upgrade support (John must have sent them at least 2 new versions which they did not provide to users), no technical support, poor packaging..etc, etc. Adib
#84792From: John BunnellJun 20, 1994 9:56 PM
Haven't had a chance to get knee deep in it yet but I will agree on the packaging. Looked like generic fruit loops box (B&W). jmb
#84849From: Adib NasleJun 21, 1994 8:00 PM
I'll keep you informed on any new developments.