Miguel, I now have PyMOL running as JNI extension under Java with two simultaneously renderers: (1) OpenGL, and (2) G3D, both running in real time and responsive to the mouse. Below are some sample images, with PyMOL above and G3D/Jmol below. Sorry no g3d color yet (we'll need an associative array linking PyMOL's color index to Jmol's in order to accomplish that without a huge performance penalty)...
http://delsci.com/jmol/050105/surface-med.jpg http://delsci.com/jmol/050105/surface-big.jpg http://delsci.com/jmol/050105/cartoon.jpg http://delsci.com/jmol/050105/spheres.jpg http://delsci.com/jmol/050105/sticks.jpg Performance seems to be reasonably good for everything but surfaces. The current implementation does make two copies of the display list (first one in C, andthen one in Java), which could be slowing things down. Cheers, Warren -- Warren L. DeLano, Ph.D. Principal Scientist . DeLano Scientific LLC . 400 Oyster Point Blvd., Suite 213 . South San Francisco, CA 94080 . Biz:(650)-872-0942 Tech:(650)-872-0834 . Fax:(650)-872-0273 Cell:(650)-346-1154 . mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Miguel > Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 7:43 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [Jmol-developers] PyMOL geometry in Jmol > > Warren wrote: > > Miguel, > > > > Oops, my mistake: You were on the right track: my Z scaling was > > exaggerated...I was mentally trying to achieve more precise depth > > buffering by using more Z bits, while forgetting that Z can't be > > scaled arbitrarily when you've got geometry with fixed Z > > dimensions...silly me! > > :-) > > > That fixes the sphere intersection problem and also (to my > surprise) > > greatly improves the surface quality -- presumably because > the normals > > are now more correct. > > Good. > > > Here are two new comparison images in which I've fixed > PyMOL's light > > source to match that of Jmol. Much better: > > > > http://delsci.com/jmol/pymol040104b.jpg > > > > http://delsci.com/jmol/jmol040104b.jpg > > Yes, very good! > > > The specular power is still mismatched but otherwise it > looks as good > > as can be expected -- this can definitely work! > > Very good. > > > As far as performace goes, this is a one-shot demo, so I don't have > > any sense of that yet. > > OK, I don't think it should be a problem. > > It should be faster than OpenGL on sphere rendering. > Triangles for large surfaces will certainly be much slower, > but I don't know how it will be. > We will have to wait and see. > > Unless you want to do another 'one-shot demo' that generates > 50K triangles on the surface of a larger macromolecule. > > > We'll need to for some code-level integration for that. > > However, it is clear to me that the existing JOGL-dependent > PyMOL JNI > > extension will need some significant work in order to "if" > or "#ifdef" > > out all the OpenGL call and then efficiently pass all the geometry > > back up to Java in an efficient manner (say for example, in > a display > > list). Once that's done, PyMOL could simply feed a stream > of integers > > that G3D or Jmol interprets as primitives for rendering. > > > > What fun! > > Cool! > > > Miguel > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues > Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. > It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt > _______________________________________________ > Jmol-developers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-developers > ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Jmol-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-developers
