Hi Dirk,
Quoting Dirk Reiners <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi Toni, > > On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 09:51 +0200, Antonio Bleile wrote: > > > Do you think you will open that can sooner or later? > > I think it would be sufficient to have animation > > support in an OpenSG file format that can be exportet > > via 3ds/maya plugin. Just look at the NVSG regarding > > the plugin/animation stuff. What is the major problem > > in supporting animations in OpenSG? > > *sigh* I need to put "The Rise of Worse Is Better" under my pillow again > (I can hear Gabriel nodding from across the pond. Hi Gabe! :). > > Adding "animation" is not difficult per se. Heck I did that for the > Cal3D Node: you just load it and it runs. There is also Rasmus' > Animation Lib that supports VRML animations. > > The problem comes when you get multiple screens, and a cluster, but > mainly when you want to have more than one Window with independent times > and animations. So far I've avoided anything global, as it allows having > an arbitrary number of Windows with totally independent scenes and > update rates. So for that you would have to keep track of multiple > times, the animated node would have to keep track of multiple times (or > all be absolute time based), and the user needs to keep track of which > time is associated with what Window/Viewport. Things get complicated > quickly. > > Not many people use ant of that, though. I would guess that at least 70% > of all applications have a single Window with a single Viewport. 20% use > a cluster or do stereo, but still only have one scene and everything is > in sync anyway. At most 10% actually use different Windows and > Viewports, and I'm not sure if those 10% don't have their own animation > systems anyway. ;) > > So maybe we should just bite that bullet and add some simple animation > that's good enough to do moving penguins or something like that. > Conceptually I still think Animation doesn't belong in the scenegraph, > but I'm not sure what the right way to handle it would be. > > I haven't looked at the animation support of any other system, not sure > how other scenegraphs handle that. Can anybody comment on that? Thanks for the exhaustive explanation, everything you say makes perfect sense. Having basic and "incorect" animation support is very appealing for low end applications and fast prototyping (from a commercial point of view). It would just complete the (already) long feature list of OpenSG. Don´t be too much a scientist on that "too fancy" feature :-) If your analysis above is correct, nearly 100% of OpenSG users won't have any disadvantage. I know that 0.00001% would be very happy :) Anybody wants to double? Thank you and kind regards, Toni ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ Opensg-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users
