Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[David Bovill]

On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 10:00, Tuviah M Snyder wrote:

> WW4 Bush hasn't started WW3 yet, give him some time.
> 
> Please contact me offlist at [EMAIL PROTECTED] I would like to work with
> you on this.
> 

Which feature Tuviah - WW3 or the OpenGL thing?

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[xbury . cs]

Amazing!

It would also be nice if you could script the objects in the view
and even their shapes/sides (like click on a side of a cube and
each side does something else... IOW, apply HyperTalk scripting to 3D
objects... one of my very oldest suggestions...)

BTW, to convice those managers, just make a presentation "using MC"
and show them side by side the features and ease of development using
MC in comparison to the cost of the other tools...  Im sure that when you tell
them or show them the last slide with "build with metacard only" they will 
understand...

cheers
Xavier

On 07/08/2003 15:05:04 metacard-admin wrote:
>> My understanding is that WW4 has begun.
>
>Oh I see... When did it begin ? When Runrev
>bought MC ?    ;-P
>
>>
>>
>> I think you'll need to write an external that draws directly into a
>> window - maybe something like the "life" external demo?
>>
>
>Well, drawing into a window isn't too difficult, and can be
>done when you use openGL in C/C++.
>I think I've achieved smthing slightly more exciting : drawing
>directly into a MC image control. Some of you probably
>remember the demo I did several months ago (still online at
>http://www.netchampagne.com/demoopengl/
>Windoze only).
>I say "more exciting" because IMHO it is more embedded
>in the MC environment than an extra window, and also it
>allows several interactive 3D windows to be included in
>the same stack simultaneously.
>As mentioned in my post from 2 weeks ago, this feature is
>now available for Win32 and Carbon.
>
>But my main question regarding the implementation of
>openGL in MC was : how end users would like to access
>3D properties and functions from within MetaTalk scripts...
>Anyone who has some experience with openGL coding
>in C/C++ or Java knows that using openGL is slightly more
>complex than setting a few QT properties for instance...
>
>I might be wrong but I have the feeling that MC users
>(or at least MC list members) are more experienced
>programers with experience in many languages / environments,
>while Rev users (or at least Rev list members) are more
>HC or Director users in search for a new tool...
>What I mean by that in that IMHO using interactive 3D
>in projects should be an attractive feature to members
>of this very list... And that good advices and wise
>considerations regarding 3D implementation should come
>from this list...
>Just imagine : networked 3D interactive apps could be
>more affordable now, requiring less development time...
>This should speak to game designers...
>
>For the anecdote, as I'm about to change job, I recently
>met a few managers of multimedia companies in Paris.
>The problem is (and has always been) that most of these ppl
>lack the technology knowledge to make good decisions
>regarding exciting projects. For that matter, they all
>think that Flash & Director (with the help of a few
>Xtras) are still the state-of-the-art for interactive
>media projects, and when I mentioned such networked 3D
>interactive apps, they immediatly thought in terms of
>long & expensive development in C/C++ ...
>
>JB
>
>___
>metacard mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Visit us at http://www.clearstream.com
  
IMPORTANT MESSAGE

Internet communications are not secure and therefore Clearstream International does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message.

The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Clearstream International or of any of its affiliates or subsidiaries.

END OF DISCLAIMER

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[David Bovill]

On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 15:50, jbv wrote:
> 
> I had a look at 3D Lingo (I dropped Director around version 4, andit made
> me feel strange to go back to this crappy sprite stuff)...
> Please don't take it personal, but it's the typical example of what
> I'd like to avoid...

Snap - left around the same time :) Still go with the users... makes it
easier for them to follow you.

> 
> is Blender cross-platform ?
> 

Used to be windows + linux pre-open source. Web site claims that the new
open source release is "OS independent" - which is future speak i
believe.

> Any useful link for that ?
> 

http://www.blender.org/

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[jbv]

Hi all,

I'm a bit surprised by the lack of response to
my post from 2 weeks ago regarding the best
way to implement openGL in MC...

Has everybody lost interest in that feature ?
Or is everyone on vacation ? Or has WW4
already began ?

Regards,
JB


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[jbv]

>
>
> I am excited about your work.

Thank you so much.After the lack of response to my post from 2 weeks ago,
I thought everyone had lost interest in it...

> It would extra cool if we could
> import 3d objects in from modeling apps as well.
>

I didn't include that option in the demo, but it's one
of the easiest thing to do I guess most 3D modelers
export to openGL format. And if they don't, there are
more than enough translators available on the net.
Format translation is also an option that could be
implemented...
I wasn't planing to create a 3D modeler with MC
anyway.
But I strongly believe that a set of (scriptable) tools to
process / modify 3D data (extrude, stretch...) could be
a great feature, because interactive 3D doesn't only
mean moving & rotating objects...

JB


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[jbv]

Hi again,

I'm afraid there's a little confusion in the word "implementation".
The only purpose of the demo I put online was to show that
realtime communication between MC and openGL was possible,
as well as displaying the rendered image in an MC img control.

Of course the final purpose is to have everything scriptable,
including 3D objects, textures they use and how they interact...

My question concerned mainly : HOW to do that in MetaTalk ?
A large set of functions and properties should be added to the
the language of course, but HOW should it be structured ?
As long as there's only a couple of textured spheres or cubes
floating around, that's not too complicated...
But what about a particule system made of metaballs bouncing
around according to a complex math function (for instance) ?

I'm presently working on a 3D sound processing app that would
display partials & spectrum of sounds in 3D (from Csound files),
and allow users to manipulate these data (first with the mouse and
various tools, and in the end with a data glove) like clay, and then
re-synthesise the sound.
So at every step of this work I try to figure out what would be the
best (read: more ergonomic / intuitive / productive) way to script it
in MT.
And sadly, it appears that coding it in C as an external with simple
calls from a MC scripts remains the most powerful & flexible way
to do... By powerful I mean : giving access to all openGL features.

>
>
> My suggestions would include a good look at Director and the 3D Lingo
> terminology and then to take the core of this and add something
> "special".

I had a look at 3D Lingo (I dropped Director around version 4, andit made
me feel strange to go back to this crappy sprite stuff)...
Please don't take it personal, but it's the typical example of what
I'd like to avoid...

>
>
> It's a vague suggestion, and I'm not up fully on the technical side -
> but the frustration I had then was the lack of ability to dynamically
> create a world. So I'd like to ba able to have an interface which would
> allow me to stream / add to / delete from / morph the OpenGL content -
> not just move around and interact with precreated environments.

This is closer to what I had in mind...

> Bringing up the open source theme again - the most exciting thing by far
> in the 3D realm from my point of view would be to take the Open Source
> code from the largest online 3D community - Blender and be able to use
> both the authoring tools and real-time engine to create and control 3D
> objects within the MC environment.

is Blender cross-platform ?

>
>
> It uses Python at the moment as a scripting language, and you could look
> at how this is implemented. From my view at the time it would make a
> more valuable product to use MC as a backend scripting language for a 3D
> front end than to play 3D windows within an MC front end?
>

Any useful link for that ?

Thanks,
JB


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[Mark Talluto]

On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 13:05, jbv wrote:
But my main question regarding the implementation of
openGL in MC was : how end users would like to access
3D properties and functions from within MetaTalk scripts...
Anyone who has some experience with openGL coding
in C/C++ or Java knows that using openGL is slightly more
complex than setting a few QT properties for instance...

I am excited about your work.  I do not have any coding experience with 
open/gl though.  I agree with David that using current terminology that 
Director uses would be a good start.  It would extra cool if we could 
import 3d objects in from modeling apps as well.

Best regards,
Mark Talluto
http://www.canelasoftware.com
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[David Bovill]

My understanding is that WW4 has begun.


On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 09:56, jbv wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I'm a bit surprised by the lack of response to
> my post from 2 weeks ago regarding the best
> way to implement openGL in MC...
> 
> Has everybody lost interest in that feature ?
> Or is everyone on vacation ? Or has WW4
> already began ?
> 
> Regards,
> JB

I think you'll need to write an external that draws directly into a
window - maybe something like the "life" external demo?

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[David Bovill]

On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 13:05, jbv wrote:
> 
> But my main question regarding the implementation of
> openGL in MC was : how end users would like to access
> 3D properties and functions from within MetaTalk scripts...
> Anyone who has some experience with openGL coding
> in C/C++ or Java knows that using openGL is slightly more
> complex than setting a few QT properties for instance...
> 

I've very little experience of OpenGL/Java, but some with VRML
(Java/Script) and MC a few years back.

> What I mean by that in that IMHO using interactive 3D
> in projects should be an attractive feature to members
> of this very list... And that good advices and wise
> considerations regarding 3D implementation should come
> from this list...

My suggestions would include a good look at Director and the 3D Lingo
terminology and then to take the core of this and add something
"special".

It's a vague suggestion, and I'm not up fully on the technical side -
but the frustration I had then was the lack of ability to dynamically
create a world. So I'd like to ba able to have an interface which would
allow me to stream / add to / delete from / morph the OpenGL content -
not just move around and interact with precreated environments.

Bringing up the open source theme again - the most exciting thing by far
in the 3D realm from my point of view would be to take the Open Source
code from the largest online 3D community - Blender and be able to use
both the authoring tools and real-time engine to create and control 3D
objects within the MC environment.

It uses Python at the moment as a scripting language, and you could look
at how this is implemented. From my view at the time it would make a
more valuable product to use MC as a backend scripting language for a 3D
front end than to play 3D windows within an MC front end?

Hope that helps.



___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[jbv]

> My understanding is that WW4 has begun.

Oh I see... When did it begin ? When Runrev
bought MC ?;-P

>
>
> I think you'll need to write an external that draws directly into a
> window - maybe something like the "life" external demo?
>

Well, drawing into a window isn't too difficult, and can be
done when you use openGL in C/C++.
I think I've achieved smthing slightly more exciting : drawing
directly into a MC image control. Some of you probably
remember the demo I did several months ago (still online at
http://www.netchampagne.com/demoopengl/
Windoze only).
I say "more exciting" because IMHO it is more embedded
in the MC environment than an extra window, and also it
allows several interactive 3D windows to be included in
the same stack simultaneously.
As mentioned in my post from 2 weeks ago, this feature is
now available for Win32 and Carbon.

But my main question regarding the implementation of
openGL in MC was : how end users would like to access
3D properties and functions from within MetaTalk scripts...
Anyone who has some experience with openGL coding
in C/C++ or Java knows that using openGL is slightly more
complex than setting a few QT properties for instance...

I might be wrong but I have the feeling that MC users
(or at least MC list members) are more experienced
programers with experience in many languages / environments,
while Rev users (or at least Rev list members) are more
HC or Director users in search for a new tool...
What I mean by that in that IMHO using interactive 3D
in projects should be an attractive feature to members
of this very list... And that good advices and wise
considerations regarding 3D implementation should come
from this list...
Just imagine : networked 3D interactive apps could be
more affordable now, requiring less development time...
This should speak to game designers...

For the anecdote, as I'm about to change job, I recently
met a few managers of multimedia companies in Paris.
The problem is (and has always been) that most of these ppl
lack the technology knowledge to make good decisions
regarding exciting projects. For that matter, they all
think that Flash & Director (with the help of a few
Xtras) are still the state-of-the-art for interactive
media projects, and when I mentioned such networked 3D
interactive apps, they immediatly thought in terms of
long & expensive development in C/C++ ...

JB

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[Tuviah M Snyder]

>Has everybody lost interest in that feature ?
>Or is everyone on vacation ? Or has WW4
>already began ?
WW4 Bush hasn't started WW3 yet, give him some time.

Please contact me offlist at [EMAIL PROTECTED] I would like to work with
you on this.

Tuviah Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
Runtime Revolution Limited - Software at the Speed of Thought
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

MC & OpenGL (update)

[jbv]

Hi list,

Although I don't have much time to spend on this
project these days, I managed to build an external
for accessing openGL on Mac. Since it's Carbon
compatible, it should run on OS8.6 to OSX (haven't
tested it on OSX though).
As I already achieved something similar on Win32
a few months ago, some sort of cross-platform
compatibility already exists.

Nevertheless, I'm still puzzled about the way to
implement openGL in a MC context.
So far, I see 3 options :

1) implement all openGL functions in MetaTalk.
I see several flaws in this option :
- there are more than 130 functions, which might
end up in a HUGE external.
- accessing openGL would still remain complicated,
as programmers would still need to think & code
simultaneously in MT, C and openGL...
- execution of scripts would be quite slow due to
the multiple calls
- some programing tricks & tips in C + openGL
would be impossible to reproduce...

2) make a selection of a limited number of openGL
functions & options, and implement them in a
MetaTalk-compatible way. In that case, programmers
would still think & code in MT, and "translation" of
the code to openGL would be completely transparent.
Again several flaws :
- how to do the selection of openGL functions ?
- execution of scripts would be quite slow due to
the multiple calls
- some programing tricks & tips in C + openGL
would be impossible to reproduce...

3) keep doing what I've done in my experiments
so far : build a different external for each project
involving openGL. Each external features only
the C functions (and openGL calls) to be used
in each specific project.
This option has several advantages :
- the size of the external remains small
- many programing tips can be used
- scripts execution (and openGL calls) are done
at high speed.
OTOH the main drawback is that a specific
C development needs to be done for each project.
Of course, reusability of large portions of code
is possible, but still : more programing & debugging
are necessary...

Actually, if implementation of openGL in MC
is quite feasable, it's not as straightforward as QT
for instance...

I would gladly apreciate any suggestion / discussion
on this topic. According to previous reactions, I know
that several list members (especially those involved in
games and / or scientific apps) are highly interested in
that option.

Last but not least : there's a 4th option.
As the company I'm working for isn't doing very well
and as I might get laid off within the next few weeks,
I can sell my skills as programer to those interested in
developping projects including 3D imagery...
I know it sounds like an heresy to fans of open source
and those who think this list should remain a place to share
code, but I guess I'll still have some monthly bills to pay,
even after I get laid off...

Thanks,
JB



___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard