[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu3dkit-discuss] 3DeLight
From: |
Philippe C . D . Robert |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu3dkit-discuss] 3DeLight |
Date: |
Sun, 9 Feb 2003 20:06:35 +0100 |
Hi,
On Sunday, January 19, 2003, at 11:34 Uhr, Gerard Iglesias wrote:
I agree more or less, but do you think we should really provide a 1
to 1 mapping of a subset of RenderMan?
No, I think that we need really :
1/ Mathematical utilities
2/ Rib compatible file format
3/ High level 3D objects, that means :
- Camera
- Light
- Shapes
- Shaders (Renderman shaders)
The Rib file format compliance means that the drawable objects will
need to handle the kind geometry Renderman accepts.
The question here is do we want to be able to read, write or read and
write RIB files. If we ie. only have to write RIBs then we could ie.
provide a special action implementation which generates a RIB from the
scene graph.
In the shapes area I see something that will permit to build easily
complex polyhedral shapes, I think of the things we can see in Maya
while manipulating polygon... And also we need curved surfaces...
And because we need to be able write new kind of 3D objects we need a
low level API to draw basic things, more than the classic conics and
triangles meshes.
Because I think that we need to make the things simple, Maybe the
simple support at the beginning for conics, Polymesh, and nurbs would
be enough.
Wrt the drawing API I think that if we can come up with an API covering
all of the RM primitives then we cover already a good portion of what
we need.
Sure that the most important thing to do is to make the global
architecture of the 3D Rendering system, the kind of supported shapes
can be postponed because it has to be easy to add new geometric shape
to the system.
The challenge is to make the shader renderman compliant.
Indeed. The problem is in the details here. I worked on the ObjC
interface for the G3DRenderer resembling the RenderMan Interface
version 3.2, covering ~80% of all of its functions (not counting the
shading part) and some of the QRM interfaces, and I realised that we
have to solve problems like matrix issues ([4][4] vs. [16]), C string
tokens vs. integer resource handlers (vs. NSString?) and so on. So the
question is should we head for strict RenderMan compliance or is it OK
to implement a RenderMan-like interface only? What do you think?
-Phil
--
Philippe C.D. Robert
http://www.nice.ch/~phip
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: [Gnu3dkit-discuss] 3DeLight,
Philippe C . D . Robert <=