Multimedia Toolkit 2/Multimedia Toolkit 2.iso/imagine/text/arc54.txt

Text File | 1994-10-27 | 298.6 KB | 8,148 lines

This is the Imagine Mailing List ([e-mail]) Archive #54
 covering messages from Sep. 03. 1994 to Oct. 03. 1994.

 If you have any questions or problems with this file, E-mail Nik Vukovljak
 at [e-mail]
 To join the IML, send email to: [e-mail] and in
 the subject line type in: subscribe

      Thanks goes to Neil Miller for the Imagine Mailing List Processor

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #1  ***************************************:-)

Subject: Transparent objects
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 15:59:03 +0059 (EDT)
From: "Mr. Scott Krehbiel; ACS (PC)" <[e-mail]>

I forgot to mention in my last message that I'm using 2.0, and
that my problem of transparent objects still showing up happens
in scanline and in trace.  They show up as an odd, dingy grey-green
over my grey background.  I have all attributes set to the
defaults, except for filter values all at 255.  I'd like to make
this thing completely dissapear, and any help would be appreciated.

Scott Krehbiel
[e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #2  ***************************************:-)

Subject: Can;t make stuff fully Xparent
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 15:40:55 +0059 (EDT)
From: "Mr. Scott Krehbiel; ACS (PC)" <[e-mail]>

I'm having a strange problem..  I've never needed to really make
something dissapear before, but I need to have an object fully
fade out past a certain distance from its origin.

I was using the radialSM texture, but when setting the transparency
values (actually filter) to 255, 255, 255,  it still showed the
object as a faint green color.  I found the same result if I
just created a primitive shape, made it fully transparent, and
rendered it... it's still visible over my background grey.

I had thought that setting filter to max values, the object would
just dissapear, but apparently not.  Does anyone have any nifty
insights on this one?

Thanks
Scott Krehbiel
[e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #3  ***************************************:-)

Subject: Sorry - no texture desciption guide
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 94 16:51:03  GMT
From: [e-mail] (Finn Kettner)

Hello out there in renderland.

I've had a few requests for the AmigaGuide version of the texture textfile
on the Imagine 3.0 distribution disks, but am sorry to say that for the
moment they will not make it to AmiNet as they might be copyrighted and I
must say that I'm not very keen on uploading copyrighted stuff to Aminet,
so untill Randy R. Wall tells us what Impulse is saying about this there
will be no files uploaded from my side (at least not the AmigaGuide file).

I might upload the texture test renderings, but as they should be there
already as collection images instead of seperate images, then I think that
it would not be necessary to upload just another batch of images.

Should Randy come back with a possitive response from Impulse, then I will
be uploading them ASAP.


Yours faithfully.
Finn Kettner.


END OF LINE
--
Fribert Consult, Chief of development
Finn Kettner, (Home address), Ved Bellahoej 17A 3 tv., DK-2700 BRH, Denmark
Home (VOICE only) ([phone]                 Fido-Net:   2:236/19.13
E-Mail: [e-mail]                         AmigaNet: 39:141/104.13

-- Via Xenolink 1.90 / XenolinkUUCP 1.0


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #4  ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Transparent objects
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 16:56:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> I forgot to mention in my last message that I'm using 2.0, and
> that my problem of transparent objects still showing up happens
> in scanline and in trace.  They show up as an odd, dingy grey-green
> over my grey background.  I have all attributes set to the
> defaults, except for filter values all at 255.  I'd like to make
> this thing completely dissapear, and any help would be appreciated.

Well, if its still happening in Trace mode then I think its because you
have the Attributes in there default setting..try what I said to and set
everything to 0 except the Filters, they should all be 255. Don't worry
about how this will morph, as it should all flow fine as everything will
fade together..

Are you using any textures on this object?

=RRW=




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #5  ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Can;t make stuff fully Xparent
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 16:41:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> I was using the radialSM texture, but when setting the transparency
> values (actually filter) to 255, 255, 255,  it still showed the
> object as a faint green color.  I found the same result if I
> just created a primitive shape, made it fully transparent, and
> rendered it... it's still visible over my background grey.
>
> I had thought that setting filter to max values, the object would
> just dissapear, but apparently not.  Does anyone have any nifty
> insights on this one?

Well, one thing you need to do is, make sure the color of the object is
completly black, in fact I find setting everything to 0 and only setting
your Filters to 255 will help. Though sometimes its hard in scanline to
get it to be completly unnoticable, but when it is at its most transparent
in the animation just remove the object from the Action Editor at that
point and it seams to work fine for most circumstances.. I have done this
in an animation were a space ship uses a cloaking device and all looked
great! The ship had a wave effect on it as it disapeared..The problem
lies in using scaneline I think? as with raytracing I have not ever run
into this problem...at least not yet...

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #6  ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Sorry - no texture desciption guide
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 17:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> so untill Randy R. Wall tells us what Impulse is saying about this there
> will be no files uploaded from my side (at least not the AmigaGuide file).

Me! well, I have one too, and am hoping to find out what Impulse says about
it, but can probably tell you right off the bat that its a no go from
Impulse. I doubt they will uncopyright it for me, or you, or anyone for
that matter.. So I would have to say if someone wants an Amiga Guide for
the textures, they make it themselves...I was planing to send them mine to
see if they may make it part of the yearly upgrade disks or available to
users of Amigas. But I kind of dought they will as this would be addmiting
that something was wrong with the way they distributed there docs, and
would be worthless for PC users, as well as take up room on the disk, a total
of 39836k when LHA'ed. So Don't expect any word from me any time soon...
But if I do here from them on the matter I will let it be known..Im willing
to give it up for nothing to Impulse if they want it..and think it would
help many users..
>
> Should Randy come back with a possitive response from Impulse, then I will
> be uploading them ASAP.

Well, I'll send it to Impulse, but if I here nothing you will here nothing..

=RRW=



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #7  ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: OLDA in preferences
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 94 11:39:18 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Milan Polle)

>The closest I could come to explaining the two regesters would be that
>the EDLE seams to control the amount of color added and the ARCC seams to
>adjust the distance of pixels used to create the effect.

Hi all,

I think the EDLE (Edge Level) is the difference-treshold between adjacent
pixels that has to be exceeded before antialiasing kicks in.
As for the ARCC (amount of rays per whatever) stands for the amount of rays used

per pixel to compute the anti-aliasing value (each ray slightly offset from the
other). The old antialiasing method probably used some kind of convolve filter
system and this could be why it didn't look very good.
Just my view of the world ofcourse :)

Let your Imagination run wild,

Milan


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #8  ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Antenna dishes
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 94 15:55:35 CET
From: cjo <[e-mail]>

>> Hi all, I'm having problems modeling a dish-shaped antenna dish. Any
>> suggestions?

>Add and axis, select it then press R/a_9 to go into Add lines, set lock
>points and Add the first point benieth the axis,. Now unselect Lock
>points and draw click the line into half the shape of a cut dish.. Press
>R/a_1 and then R/a_E for the Extrude requester, Now select Sweep and set
>the number of sections to 24, click OK... Theres the Dish, you could
>probably make the rest of the shapes using the same method.. But it
>depends on what you want..

>> I also need to add a wire mesh to the dish.  Should I use a transparency
>> map so the background shows throuh the grid or perpendicular grid
>> textures on a transparent object?

>Well, I personally would use a brush wrap as I could customize it to my
>needs.

>RRW

  I've made a couple of satellite-dishes myself. But i did it a little bit
  differently.

  1. Create a cone (ADD PRIMITIVE CONE) with (say) 12 vertical sections.

  2. Make it flat by setting the y-size =0 (you now have a circle).

  3. Conform the circle to a sphere (you'll have to experiment a little with
     the two parameters to get it right).

  4. Size the dish to your own preferences. Perhaps you would like it to
     be elliptic :-)

  5. If you want the dish to have depth you'll just have to EXTRUDE it.

  6. If you want the front and the back to have different attribute-settings
     you just pick all the faces on the back (or the front, that is your own
     choice) by PICK RANGE and FRACTURE them from the rest of the antenna.
     (I did this to make the front white and the back gold-colored as this
     is rather usual for antennas on communication satellites.)

  Hope this will help!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|   Conny Joensson   |   Swedish Space Corp. Esrange            |
|   Kiruna           |   Satellite operations - Telecom Div.    |
|   Sweden           |   [e-mail]              |
-----------------------------------------------------------------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #9  ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Antenna dishes
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 94 15:55:35 CET
From: cjo <[e-mail]>

>> Hi all, I'm having problems modeling a dish-shaped antenna dish. Any
>> suggestions?

>Add and axis, select it then press R/a_9 to go into Add lines, set lock
>points and Add the first point benieth the axis,. Now unselect Lock
>points and draw click the line into half the shape of a cut dish.. Press
>R/a_1 and then R/a_E for the Extrude requester, Now select Sweep and set
>the number of sections to 24, click OK... Theres the Dish, you could
>probably make the rest of the shapes using the same method.. But it
>depends on what you want..

>> I also need to add a wire mesh to the dish.  Should I use a transparency
>> map so the background shows throuh the grid or perpendicular grid
>> textures on a transparent object?

>Well, I personally would use a brush wrap as I could customize it to my
>needs.

>RRW

  I've made a couple of satellite-dishes myself. But i did it a little bit
  differently.

  1. Create a cone (ADD PRIMITIVE CONE) with (say) 12 vertical sections.

  2. Make it flat by setting the y-size =0 (you now have a circle).

  3. Conform the circle to a sphere (you'll have to experiment a little with
     the two parameters to get it right).

  4. Size the dish to your own preferences. Perhaps you would like it to
     be elliptic :-)

  5. If you want the dish to have depth you'll just have to EXTRUDE it.

  6. If you want the front and the back to have different attribute-settings
     you just pick all the faces on the back (or the front, that is your own
     choice) by PICK RANGE and FRACTURE them from the rest of the antenna.
     (I did this to make the front white and the back gold-colored as this
     is rather usual for antennas on communication satellites.)

  Hope this will help!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|   Conny Joensson   |   Swedish Space Corp. Esrange            |
|   Kiruna           |   Satellite operations - Telecom Div.    |
|   Sweden           |   [e-mail]              |
-----------------------------------------------------------------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #10 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Essence3 ?
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 94 17:26:41 METDST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Steiner)

Hi !

I have heard that Essence3 is available now.
Now my question: Is Forge a part of Essence3 automatically?

Michael Steiner


--


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #11 ***************************************:-)

Subject: GigaMem&Imagine
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 94 17:24:25 METDST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Steiner)

Hi Bill !


Thanks for your Tips with GigaMem,
You did it the same way like I did hundred times before but I always closed
the prefs window, but even now (after your help) Gigamem does not work. :-(
Imagine shows that I should have 20 MB of memory but when I try to use
them the computer crashes or a window (out of memory) appears.

I would be very glad if you could tell me your exact configuration.
What I want to know are your settings in - attribute, mask, minsize,
buffer memory and chache memory. It could also be a great help when you
tell me if you use Imagine as an new program or an new task.
I only tried to use Imagine, but may be it should be an new task?

Thanks.


Michael Steiner

[e-mail]


 --


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #12 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Imagine-Objects on CD
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 94 17:37:40 METDST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Steiner)

Hi !


There are 2 new CDs available from CVS and TGV (two German producers).
On these 2 CDs are 500 attributes, lots of brushmaps and many
Postscriptfonts for Imagine. Of course there are also lots of objects.
All in all the CDs are great. Sorry, but may be that they are only
available in Germany, but at least you should try to get them because
they are worth it.
The CDs are called "Amiga Raytracing 1" and "Amiga Raytracing 2".
The objects are in 8 formats (Imagine, Lightwave, Real3D2,
Reflections2.x, Maxon Cinema 4D, Sculpt, DXF and Caligari) so the CDs are
not only for Imagine Users.

And the best (or not ? :-))) ) some objects are from me.
These are: Armbanduhr, fighter, city and some more ...

Michael Steiner
[e-mail]


--


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #13 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: ver 3.1
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 1994 09:51:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gerard Menendez <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 5 Sep 1994, MiKE wrote:

> Hi all,
> Anyone seen hide or hair of the 3.1 "upgrade"?  (should read "bug-fix" :(  )
> I'm thinking of buying the 4 upgrades for $100 scheme, and wished to know
> whether now is a good time to start.


I haven't.  I purchased the constant upgrade program a day or two after
an announcement was posted here.  The person on the phone seemed to say
that they would send it in a few days.  I recieved a brochure a few days
later and wonder if that was what he meant would be sent.

I'm sure it will show up, but probably not when they say it will.
It won't have all the promised features, but it will be worth the money.

Gerard

P.S. IM3.1 seemed to have enough features to count as more than a bug fix.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #14 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Essence3 ?
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 94 10:18:00 PDT
From: [e-mail]

Michael Steiner wrote:
>Now my question: Is Forge a part of Essence3 automatically?

No, you must purchase Forge separately.  But at $29, there's no
big deal!

BTW, I ordered Forge more than three weeks ago, and it has not
yet been delivered.  I called APEX last Thursday and Friday, but I
only listened to an answering machine.  Hmmmm.  Hope they're just
on vacation.  (Today is Monday for me, and I live in BC, Canada.
Max Mail Time should be 7 to 10 days, typically 3 or 4!)
\KenR


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #15 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: ver 3.1 (fwd)
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 1994 23:32:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gerard Menendez <[e-mail]>

Hi All,

Here's a message from Mike H. re 3.1.  I'm reposting in it's entirety to
avoid misquotiing.

P.S.  Note the time, guess we all work late.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 05 Sep 94 21:40:36 EDT
From: Mike Halvorson <[e-mail]>
To: Gerard Menendez <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ver 3.1

Gerard

    We will be shipping Imagine 3.1 from the constant update service program
on Friday of this coming week, I think that date is September 9th, and as the
posting here and on CIS states, all the promised features will be in the code.
If you are speaking of something else please let me know.

    We are a bit behind about 2 weeks behind to be exact, not tooo bad when
you get a chance to see what we have done.

    Mike

    PS:  Please repost this if you feel so inclined.




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #16 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: OLDA in preferences
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 1994 00:34:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> >The closest I could come to explaining the two regesters would be that
> >the EDLE seams to control the amount of color added and the ARCC seams to
> >adjust the distance of pixels used to create the effect.
>
> I think the EDLE (Edge Level) is the difference-treshold between adjacent
> pixels that has to be exceeded before antialiasing kicks in.
> As for the ARCC (amount of rays per whatever) stands for the amount of rays us
ed
> per pixel to compute the anti-aliasing value (each ray slightly offset from th
e
> other). The old antialiasing method probably used some kind of convolve filter

> system and this could be why it didn't look very good.
> Just my view of the world ofcourse :)

Well, thanks for the technical info on it, but I was just giving my
opinion on what they seam to actually effect on an image or edge. Not
while in the rendering engine, or how they actually work.

Just thought I'de clear this up, as I was only trying to help those who
may have no idea what they do, or the effect these setting can cause
on an image..

=RRW=




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #17 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: 3.1 upgrade coming
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 1994 08:49:28 -0500 (CDT)
From: Cliff Lee <[e-mail]>

On Tue, 6 Sep 1994, gregory denby wrote:

> Is it very awkward to switch between the bare config Imagine requires
> and say (icky icky) Windoze?

No problem.  DOS 5.0 and above has multiple config/autoexec's built into
it.  So you can boot to an option screen.  Each entry can be optimized
for whatever program you choose to run.  To find out more about this,
type HELP CONFIG to review options for your config.sys file.  The
multiple configuration option will be on that screen somewhere.

With that said, you should be able to run Imagine with the same
configuration as Windows.  The key here is to avoid using EXPANDED memory
managers.  Since Windows has no use for expanded memory, there is little
need to use it (possible exception would be to optimize device drivers if
you have a lot of them...).  Which is fine with Imagine since it barfs
in a particularly ugly manner when expanded memory managers are present.

Cliff Lee           [e-mail]
"You can always make up a class,
 You can never  make up a party!"


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #18 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: 3.1 upgrade coming
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 94 10:11:45 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Joe Cotellese)

>I have a question to the ImaginePC owners.  Since my main machine appears
>to be quite messed, I suppose I may be buying a PC in awhile.  Is it very
>awkward to switch between the bare config Imagine requires and say (icky
>icky) Windoze?  As you may infer, my main machine is Amiga.
>
>Back to tracing,
>
>Greg Denby

Greg,

Using DOS 6.2 you can have a boot menu that will allow you to boot with
multiple configurations.  I have found this to be the best way to deal with
Imagine and Windows.  The only problems I have are that Imagine can't use a
DPMI host.  And also that I can run it under NT or OS/2.  I REALLY miss
multi-tasking and would be more than happy to sacrifice some rendering time
for the ability to do other things.  I'm using a Pentium so any loss in
rendering time is still going to be significantly faster than my 030 based
Amiga.

Joe Cotellese



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #19 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: 3.1 upgrade coming
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 1994 10:03:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ed Totman <[e-mail]>

On Tue, 6 Sep 1994, gregory denby wrote:

> I have a question to the ImaginePC owners.  Since my main machine appears
> to be quite messed, I suppose I may be buying a PC in awhile.  Is it very
> awkward to switch between the bare config Imagine requires and say (icky
> icky) Windoze?  As you may infer, my main machine is Amiga.
>

I use a 486-66 with 20 mb ram and a PAR board.  I run Imagine, windoze,
and the PAR without rebooting.  Also run the cdrom changer as a tsr to
listen to music while I animate.  The PC doesn't really multitask like
the Amiga, but it does run Imagine faster on the 486 compared to the
030, in my experience.

Ed Totman
[e-mail]





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #20 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Atts info
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 1994 20:47:48 -0800 (PDT)
From: Scott Lundholm <[e-mail]>

Hi All,

     Just a short note to diseminate some information about the Attribute file
that has been talked so much about lately. The file was sent to me by Soren
Wind for uploading to wuarchive.wustl.edu, and was originaly three seperate
files (atts-1.lha, atts-2.lha and atts-3.lha). These three files are still on
wustl, under gfx/3d. I have just looked through all three of the files and have
not found any Essence textures. There are some of the attributes that do,
however, require Essence. Many of these attribute files are also not plain
attribute files, but are objects with the attribute's already set.

     I did find in the brick & wood dir's several files that may be copywritted.

These files are: brick1master.att, brick2master.att, brick3master.att and
woodmater.att (If I remeber the exact spelling of the attributes). These files,
if memory serves me correctly belong to a set of disks called "Surface Master",
with a second set of disks called "Map Master". I do not remember the publisher
of these two set's of disks, but they were comercial products.

     I do not know how to go about getting uploads removed from wustl, but if
someone would E-Mail the info, I will have the files removed and replace them
with files that have the Surface Master attribute files removed.

     I now return you to your regularly scheduled bit stream.

                                                      Scott Lundholm

 *----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 | Amiga 500/030 at 38Mhz w/68882 at |        Email [e-mail]         |
 | 50Mhz, 8Meg of 32-bit RAM, Bodega |                 N6GMJ                  |
 | Bay w/105M,450M, & 1G Hard Drives,|HAM radio operator, Electronics junkie, |
 | HP PaintJet, 16" HP Programmable  |Computer Nerd, 3D Rendering Enthusiast, |
 | Multisynch w/Retina 24bit card.   |  and graphics fanatic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  |
 *----------------------------------------------------------------------------*


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #21 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Signing Freeware Objects
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 94 21:41:00 PDT
From: [e-mail]

I just thought of a neat-o way to sign free-ware objects!

Besides creating your name (or logo or whatever) without faces, join
it to the inside of the object somewhere so that it is difficult, if not
downright impossible, to remove.  It won't affect the trace in any
way (you wouldn't want it to).  The placement of the signature should be
such it can be seen clearly in wireframe, but not when traced.

Hmmmm....

The problem with shareware objects is that when someone uses them in
a prominent animation, it is difficult to get credit.  After all, the
end-user i.e. purchaser or funder of the anim doesn't care where the
CGI objects came from - just that they're there!

HOWEVER:  Placing your objects in an LHA file on aminet with a description
and a blurb stating "Can not be used without consent of the author for
purposes of getting rich blah blah blah" would provide you with copyright
protection.  In essence, uploading the objects to Aminet is like
"publishing" your objects.

"OOOOOF!" <sound of armchair lawyer being pushed off of sofa>
\KenR
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I had a dollar for everytime I heard that line...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #22 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Imagine for SGI
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 18:28:42 +1000
From: [e-mail]

Howdy heres my first post.

Is there a version of Imagine for SGI coming in the near future?

Also,is there a version for the Pentium. I noticed that some people seem to
have imagine running on Pentium machines but is there a speed up, or will
it require a Pentium specific version. The Amiga is my machine of choice,
but I also have access to an Indigo and quite frankly I prefer working with
imagine rather than ALIAS, although I am not a seasoned Alias user.

David Haines
College of Fine Arts
Phone: +61 +2 +339-9555
Fax:   +61 +2 +339-9506





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #23 ***************************************:-)

Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 12:03:28 +1000
From: [e-mail]

> > >The closest I could come to explaining the two regesters would be that
> > >the EDLE seams to control the amount of color added and the ARCC seams to
> > >adjust the distance of pixels used to create the effect.
> >
> > I think the EDLE (Edge Level) is the difference-treshold between adjacent
> > pixels that has to be exceeded before antialiasing kicks in.
> > As for the ARCC (amount of rays per whatever) stands for the amount of rays
used
> > per pixel to compute the anti-aliasing value (each ray slightly offset from
the
> > other). The old antialiasing method probably used some kind of convolve filt
er
> > system and this could be why it didn't look very good.
> > Just my view of the world ofcourse :)
>
> Well, thanks for the technical info on it, but I was just giving my
> opinion on what they seam to actually effect on an image or edge. Not
> while in the rendering engine, or how they actually work.
>
> Just thought I'de clear this up, as I was only trying to help those who
> may have no idea what they do, or the effect these setting can cause
> on an image..
>
> =RRW=

Well, sorry, but I just thought explaining what effects the variables have, woul
d
make setting them a bit easier. But then again maybe my explanation is a bit too

complicated.

Milan


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #24 ***************************************:-)

Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 12:54:19 +1000
From: [e-mail]

Hi everyone,

    Thanks for your help with the Nebula texture problem I was
having.  I tried the various help that everyone sent and still didn't get
the object to display the effect properly.

    I eneded up using the ESSENCE I fractalfilter on a fog object.
This worked sort of how I envisaged it but I still don't understand why
Nebula barfed on me.  I'm going to try all of the settings on a default
sphere now and work from there.

    Thanks again everyone.

PS Randy R Wall if your listening, I tried to post you privately but my
mail kept bouncing back.  I'll keep trying as I've some thingfs to chat
about.

    On another note, this might be old news but did anyone notice the
setting STGF - default staging file name.
    You just give it the path of a default staging file and every
time you start a new project you get what you've setup.  Rather neat and
it's not documented in the manual that I can find.

    And on another note :)

    I am running an Amiga 4000 /030 on a 1950 and when I display a
render in DBLPAL everything is perfect.  If I use a normal PAL screen,
wherever colour 0 is turns out to be a dark grey.  The pallette requester
tells me that it is at 0.

    When my 1084s is connected the same PAL screen is black on colour
0.  Then when I plug in a Neriki Genlock, it goes back to dark grey.
    Is this crazy or what.

anway sorry to rattle on so much.  If anyone has any ideas about any of
this, please mail me privately so we don't take up the bandwidth.

See ya
David Shaw
Pixel Byte GFX

[e-mail]




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #25 ***************************************:-)

Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 13:46:58 +1000
From: [e-mail]

    Hi,

    I was wondering if you all know of any _GOOD_ cdrom's out there
with Imagine related stuff that I might look for at the upcoming show
here.  Maybe some good brushmap CD's, fonts,... etc., even meshes!  I have
PC Version2.0 of Imagine.

    Thanks,
    Ed

/****************************************************************************/
/* Ed Phillips  [e-mail]      University of Delaware       */
/* Jr Systems Programmer  [phone]    IT/Network and Systems Services */
/****************************************************************************/



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #26 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Technical Answers
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 94 23:10:11 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike Tucibat)

Randy and Milan discuss:

M> > Well, thanks for the technical info on it, but I was just giving my
M> > opinion on what they seam to actually effect on an image or edge. Not
M> > while in the rendering engine, or how they actually work.
M> >
M> > Just thought I'de clear this up, as I was only trying to help those who
M> > may have no idea what they do, or the effect these setting can cause
M> > on an image..
M> >
M> > =RRW=
M>
M> Well, sorry, but I just thought explaining what effects the variables
M> have, would
M> make setting them a bit easier. But then again maybe my explanation is a
M> bit too
M> complicated.
M>
M> Milan
==========================

        Hey-- I don't think you can be too complex, or too basic.

        Users at many different levels are on this list, and one of
        the many cool things about it is that answers come from many
        different perspectives and levels of understanding.  If an
        answer is more than a particular user wanted to know, it will
        undoubtedly be valuable for someone else reading it.

        I like it all!  :)

        And while I'm here, I have a neat little program that I got off
        some cover disk a long time ago, called "fr", that makes 3D trees
        that can be converted to Imagine objects.  It came with source
        code, so I'm thinking it might be OK to share.  I'd like to, if
        it wouldn't be illegal.  Anybody know?

        L8R

        -mikeT





* Offline Orbit 0.70b * ...Sleep is a poor substitute for Raytracing...




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #27 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Imagine for SGI
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 22:43:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> Is there a version of Imagine for SGI coming in the near future?

I have heard rumors of this coming true, but then heard that Impulse is
going for the Mac version first. So it maybe a while..nothing official
yet that I have heard..

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #28 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: OLDA in preferences
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 23:10:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> > Well, thanks for the technical info on it, but I was just giving my
> > opinion on what they seam to actually effect on an image or edge. Not
> > while in the rendering engine, or how they actually work.
> >
> > Just thought I'de clear this up, as I was only trying to help those who
> > may have no idea what they do, or the effect these setting can cause
> > on an image..
> >
> > =RRW=
>
> Well, sorry, but I just thought explaining what effects the variables have,
> would make setting them a bit easier. But then again maybe my explanation
> is a bit too > complicated.
>
> Milan

I think you took my reply the wrong way..I thanked you for the technical
info, but was only stating why I did not give it in such a manner..So
there is no need to be sorry..I am sure there are many others who would
liked to have had more info, and you have abliged them.. I'm sorry if I
some how offended you. I was not meaning to..

And no it is not to complicated, at least not for me..but might be for
some newer users. But could be helpful to more advanced users, so I
welcome your additional input...Hope this clears it up?

=RRW=




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #29 ***************************************:-)

Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 04:40:33 +1000
From: [e-mail]

Dear All.

    I'm having trouble with th fog attributes in Imagine 3.0 - for
some reason I get the feeling that the manual isn't quite saying
everything that I need to know .... :)

    I want to have a layer of fog - something like you see in
cheap sci fi which is dense at the bottom and gradually thins out to
transparency at the top.

    I guess that the FogTop texture is the best one to use, I have
applied a Fog attribute to an extruded plane to give a rectilinear
volume of fog, but I just can't seem to get a nice smooth effect. So
can anyone give me some suggestions on suitable settings for the
effect I want ? (Preferably *NOT* in the language that the texture is
described in in the Imagine 3.0 distribution)

    Email me if this is old hat / really dumb etc.

            Thanks very much in adavance.

                    Mike.

You can reach Mike Richards at the following   /@\            \|/
address ... (if you're that desperate).       `-\ \  ______  - 0 -
                                                 \ \/ ` /  \  /|\ _
            [e-mail]                        \_i / \  |\____//
                                                    | |==| |=----/
---- Why not drop me a line ...? -------------------hn/--hn/-----------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #30 ***************************************:-)

Subject: trees
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 18:44:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Edwin Phillips <[e-mail]>

    Hi,

    On the subject of trees... someone posted/pointed to a small set
of C code to generate trees on the Rayshade mailing list.  The code
generates "fractal trees" as input files to rayshade.  It is a .shar
(shell archive) file, which I could email to anyone who's interested.  It
might not be useful for Imagine directly, but the code could very well be
modified to make it useful for Imagine (I don't know of any
Rayshade<-->Imagine converter, yet).

    Ed

/****************************************************************************/
/* Ed Phillips  [e-mail]      University of Delaware       */
/* Jr Systems Programmer  [phone]    IT/Network and Systems Services */
/****************************************************************************/



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #31 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Jupiter Crash Animation and the BBC
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 18:11:27 MST
From: [e-mail] (John R. Spencer)

More miscellaneous comments on that Imagine comet crash animation:

The BBC in London ended up using my Imagine Jupiter/Comet crash
animation for their news broadcasts, like many other networks, and
they also used a second animation that used a combination of Imagine
and Vistapro, which showed the flashes on Jupiter lighting up a
volcano on the nightside of Io.  This second animation they adapted
to produce their own "virtual reality" spot which had the news
reader (David Simmons???) and their science correspondent actually
standing on the surface of Io watching the flashes on Jupiter.

Anyway, as a result of my help with this enterprise I got a chance
to tour the BBC Television Center in London on a recent visit to
the UK.  I got a look in the room where they do the computer graphics
for the TV News, and the first thing I saw was someone working in
the Detail Editor of Imagine on an A2000, putting a logo or something
together.  They use a lot of high-end graphics software and hardware
as well, but it sure was nice to see Imagine being used in such
exalted surroundings.

In reply to Ted Stethem, the glow and fade of the impact sites as
they rotated around Jupiter was done with the "Radial" texture
morphing between different colors, and the transparency morphing
up to 100% as the site faded.  Of course, the way the impacts
turned out in real life the sites never really faded away...

The "lightbeams" shooting off the rotating comet nucleus in the
foreground were supposed to be jets of dust being emitted by
the nucleus, but they did end up looking more like lightbeams.
One of the less successful aspects of the animation...

John.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #32 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Help with fur or hair...
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 23:43:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bush Doktor <[e-mail]>

     Has anyone been able to recreate fur or hair in imagine?  I'm
trying to make a mane for a lion.  I've got everything else done,
but the mane is a killer.

    Thanks




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #33 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Using Fog Objects...
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 06:30:38 -0500
From: gregory denby <[e-mail]>

Michael Richards writes,
>I'm having trouble with the fog attributes... &
>I guess that the FogTop texture is the best one to use,

Well, my experience with the FogTop is that its probably not quite what you
want, which I assume is a rather smooth fade away, or perhaps slightly
billowy.  FogTop appears to giva a rather grainy fade, more like a particle
effect.  Altho I've spent way too much time playing with textures, I can't
think of any right off hand that will give the effect you want unless
you use an Essence texture.  There are several ways to use transition
textures for nice fade aways.  However, if you don't happen to have the
Essence collection...
Try using a plane with a transparency map placed over it. Place this infront
of your camera.  The down side of this is increased rendering time :-(.
Or, make a single plane, not extruded, set it to an appropriate fog length
and rotate it so that its top is farther away from the camera.  That way
the amount of fog applied near the top of the scene will be less than at the bot
tom.
As a general bit of advice, in order to check out texture performance,
I make a quarter screen anim of 16-24 frames during which I morph a texture
parameter (or two).  This is the quickest way I've found to get a handle on
how a texture works.
Good Luck

Greg Denby
[e-mail]

"Let's watch Big Brother"


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #34 ***************************************:-)

Subject: SIMILAR-PRESS RE
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 94 22:48:35 -0300
From: [e-mail]

The following is Press Release from Glenn Lewis.  It should be of
interest to anyone who uses Imagine, especially those who use data
sets such as Tim Wilson's HUMANOID dataset.

-GreG

----------------------------------------------------------------------

                         Announcing "Similar"
                   Copyright 1994 by Glenn M. Lewis
                          Version 1.0 - 9/94

    Similar is a program that operates either on Imagine object files
or Envisage object files.  (Note, however, that it is not possible to
work on *both* IOB and SCE files during the same execution!)  It runs
from the command line and comes compiled for either the Amiga or the
PC.  Please specify which you want when you order or I will send you
the PC version!

    Similar takes as input 3 object files and outputs a new object.
All objects must have the same topology.  In other words, all objects
must be derived from the same object and must have the same number of
points, edges, and faces.  This is the same restriction that Imagine
places on objects that are to be morphed.

    In a nutshell, Similar will read the first two objects, compare
the differences in point (vertex) placement, and then apply these
differences to the third object in order to create the output object.

    For example, let's say you have purchased Tim Wilson's excellent
Humanoid package.  You copy the strong man's face to a new face
object, and called it "Charley".  You go into your favorite modeling
editor, and start modifying the face to give you harley's unique
facial features, including moving points around, changing colors,
applying image maps, etc.

    Now let's say that you wish to make an animation using Charley,
and you would like to make him speak as well as get angry and smile,
etc.  Do you want to go through and modify each of the expressions
from Tim's Humanoid package to convert each one of them into Charley?
Of course not!  Simply run "similar" over each set of expressions from
the strong man, and apply those changes to Charley.  Voila!  You now
have a whole new set of morphable objects that all have Charley's
unique facial characteristics that you can use in an animation.

    Here is an example PC batch file containing the commands you would
perform, courtesy of Doug Kelly ([e-mail]) who also wrote two
fantastic articles in "3D Artist" (Issue #17) about the process.
Thanks, Doug!

**************************************************************************
REM The following batch file converts all the MANSTRNG head targets to
REM Charley head targets.
REM CONVERTING HUMANOID HEADS TO CHARLEY PATTERN

REM IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT!
REM
REM Make sure that both "similar.exe" and "dos4gw.exe" are in your PATH!
REM
REM IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT!

cd c:\humanoid\manstrng\heads\emotions
copy c:\humanoid\manstrng\heads\normal.iob
copy c:\humanoid\manstrng\heads\charley.iob
similar.exe normal.iob fear.iob     charley.iob charfear.iob
similar.exe normal.iob anger.iob    charley.iob charangr.iob
similar.exe normal.iob stern.iob    charley.iob charstrn.iob
similar.exe normal.iob surprise.iob charley.iob charsurp.iob
similar.exe normal.iob sadness.iob  charley.iob charsad.iob
similar.exe normal.iob smile.iob    charley.iob charsmil.iob
similar.exe normal.iob grin.iob     charley.iob chargrin.iob
similar.exe normal.iob crying.iob   charley.iob charcryg.iob
del normal.iob
del charley.iob


cd c:\humanoid\manstrng\heads\phonemes
similar.exe normal.iob 1closed.iob  charley.iob charclos.iob
similar.exe normal.iob 2parted.iob  charley.iob charpart.iob
similar.exe normal.iob 3prtopen.iob charley.iob charprto.iob
similar.exe normal.iob 4open.iob    charley.iob charopen.iob
similar.exe normal.iob 5wide.iob    charley.iob charwide.iob
similar.exe normal.iob 6gape.iob    charley.iob chargape.iob
similar.exe normal.iob 7pucker.iob  charley.iob charpuck.iob
del normal.iob
del charley.iob
cd \
REM ALL DONE.  HAVE FUN!
**************************************************************************

    Similar can also be used for "dressing" the humanoid torsos.  You
simply change one of the torsos to look like a shirt, and then you can
modify all of the other torsos to have shirts as well, since Tim based
all the torsos on the sme object.

    Doug found another use recently: I created a flag, and then
modified it so that it was "drooping" as if there was no wind.  I
morphed between the two.  Later on, I decided to glue an image map to
its surface.  Normally, I would have had to hand-modify the object
*again* (after I applied the glued image map) so that the glue would
stick and modify the image map in the new "droopy" position.  Doug
told me to use "similar" to modify the glued-straight-flag into a new
handy-dandyglued-drooped-flag... and it worked!  Very handy.

    OK, so how to you get "similar"?  Send a check for $20 US dollars
(plus $5 if you live overseas to cover shipping) to:

Glenn M. Lewis           ([e-mail] or [e-mail])
8341 Olive Hill Court
Fair Oaks, CA  95628
USA

REMEMBER to ask for the PC or Amiga version, please!  Also, I will
send 3.5" disks if not otherwise specified.

    As a bonus for your order, I will send you "emph" (short for
"Emphasize") that reads in two objects (ObjA and ObjB) and emphasizes
the differences between the two by a user-supplied factor, and writes
out a new object based on ObjA.  This is great for blowing facial
features out of proportion for some really weird effects.  It also
makes it extremely convenient to make slight modifications to objects.
For example, if you want to create "Charley" such that he has more
pronounced cheek-bones, a slightly larger nose, and more protruding
eyebrows, you could simply make a grossly different face by pulling
(in your modeler) on the cheeks, nose, and eyebrows way far out, as if
spikes are sticking out of the head.  Then, simply tone down the
differences using "emph" and a difference factor of less than one, say
0.1, for example.  Voila!  You have Charley, whose facial features are
slightly different from the "normal" man, but who is obviously a
different person.

    Usage for "emph" is:    emph [scale_factor] ObjA ObjB NewObj

"Similar" and "Emph" are Copyright 1994 by Glenn M. Lewis, All Rights
Reserved.  They are NOT freely distributable.

    WARNING: Executables are embedded with a seria number that I keep
a database of so that I can identify who is pirating and take
appropriate action.  If you do not like this, do not order the
programs from me.  The embedded serial numbers have no affect on the
execution of the program and are there only for my identification
purposes.

    Free technical support to registered owners will be provided via
e-mail.  If you have problems with Similar or Emph, please compress
(or LHA or ZIP) the objects you are working on, uuencode it an e-mail
to me (see above) and describe the problem.  I will either find a bug
in my programs and fix them and send you an update, or will dump the
objects out and show you that they do not have identical topologies,
and remind you that Similar and Emph must be used on objects that have
identical topologies.  :-)  That is, all points, edges, and faces must
have the same number and must be in the same order within the objects.

    As an added bonus, I will include my public domain "melt" program
that appeared as the lead article in the July 1994 annual Computer
Graphics issue of Dr. Dobbs Journal.  Usage for "melt" is:
    melt [number_of_frames] inObject outfile_root

    Installation instructions for PC:
When you receive the diskette, copy the following files to some
directory that is in your "PATH" (defined in your autoexec.bat).  To
see your current path, simply type "path".  The files are:
        similar.exe, emph.exe, melt.exe, and dos4gw.exe

    Installation instructions for the Amiga:
When you receive the diskette, copy the following files to some
directory that is in your shell's path:
    similar, emph, and melt

    That's it!  Enjoy!
                                                   -- Glenn Lewis

----------------------------------------------------------------------



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #35 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Help with fur or hair...
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 00:35:08 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 8 Sep 1994, Bush Doktor wrote:

>
>      Has anyone been able to recreate fur or hair in imagine?  I'm
> trying to make a mane for a lion.  I've got everything else done,
> but the mane is a killer.
>

Mate if you can find out how to do hair WOW! I mean I got Humanoid
recently and I expected hair but...no so if you figure it out give us a
yell :)

MH





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #36 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Suns
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 01:02:03 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>

Guys/gals do any of you have any idea how I can achieve the look of a sun
ie: a lenflare but one that looks like a sun...also the kind that the
vehicles have on Seaquest DSV ...I would appreciate lenflare values or a
complete tutorial :)

MH







+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #37 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Help with fur or hair...
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 1994 11:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Hey Bush,

    My attempts at realistic tree-foliage actually yielded pretty
neat looking 'fur.'  I started out with a sphere, yanked it's
points all around to give it the shape of a 3D treetop, then experimented
with various degrees of fog, in the attributes requestor. My tree foliage
came out looking more like smoke.  As one of the trees I was trying to
produce was a 'smoke tree,' this was quite acceptible.

    Seems like this would be great for your lion's mane.  You'd get a
sort of fluffed-out, afro-looking mane.

On Thu, 8 Sep 1994, Bush Doktor wrote:

>
>      Has anyone been able to recreate fur or hair in imagine?  I'm
> trying to make a mane for a lion.  I've got everything else done,
> but the mane is a killer.
>
>     Thanks
>
>
>


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #38 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Help with fur or hair...
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 09:16:56 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>

On Fri, 9 Sep 1994 [e-mail] wrote:

>
> IT>On Thu, 8 Sep 1994, Bush Doktor wrote:
>
> If you also have Access to Lightwave you could try making the Hair
> there, make the Basic shape then use the "Jitterize" tool to get decent
> looking Hair

I've been looking at moving to Lightwave..but I'll stick with Imagine for
now and see if Impulse bring out everything they promised ie: Sound etc...

Do you know of a good way to model hair in Imagine (I'm forms editor
illiterate:)

MH





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #39 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Help with fur or hair...
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 1994 21:41:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

There are some JPEG files over on Compuserve that feature mythological
creatures and a male jogger. I have yet to ask the renderer to
confirm this, but my suspicion is that they are image maps.

Can you imagine how time (rendering *and* mdeling time) consuming this
would be to create individual hairs? And memory constraints!!

I will be firing off a letter this weekend, and when I get an answer I will
post it, but I am fairly certain that this is the only sane way!

(FYI - the mythological characters are a centaur, satyr and minotaur.
Pretty good looking, too!

***** Paul *****
[e-mail]

Windows 3.0 - From the same people that brought you EDLIN.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #40 ***************************************:-)

Subject: RE: SAVING MONEY ON PER-MADE 3D
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 94 21:02:05 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Christopher Stewart)

>>Or if you don't have the CD-ROM and would like to get it you can call
>>1800-328-2738. The CD is FREE from VIEWPOINT  DATALABS  but I'm sorry the
>>data is not.
>>* Distribution of full access key expires on Sep.30 1994 ...so act fast or
>>lose out
>>** Offer only valid in NEW YORK CITY


>So basically you are saying that we send you 200 dollars and you give us a
>pirated code?
>Doesn't sound to kosher to me.
>
>Joe Cotellese

     I contacted America Online and this gentleman's usenet has been
pulled. I hope Viewpoint nails 'em too. If this ever happens (a message
you object to, that is) send a reply to the same address but substitute
"postmaster" for the users name. It'll reach the site's administrator.
Make sure to explain WHY the post is offensive or illeagal as some don't
get it ;-).
     On Imagine related topics <grin>, I SAW THE LIGHT! I finally grasped
an understanding of how bones work and have animated a complete figure
with shoulder shrugs, the works. It's kind of hard to explain the concept
but I think I like it! With that, a couple of deformations and Eadweard,
I'm off and running <pun>. As the manual says, experiment!

                    Christopher


--
"I wish there was a knob on the TV             [e-mail]
 to turn up the intelligence.                  [e-mail]
 There's a knob called `brightness',           Christopher Stewart
 but it doesn't work." -- Gallagher            Animation/Graphic Arts/Telecomm


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #41 ***************************************:-)

Subject: animated brushmap trouble
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 00:05:43 +0059 (EDT)
From: "Mr. Scott Krehbiel; ACS (PC)" <[e-mail]>

Hi everyone
I'm having some trouble sticking an animated brushmap on an object
in 2.0.   I have ten frames, called ptype.0001 thru ptype.0010,
and I told the attributes editor to use the brushmap called
ptype with a max sequence # of 10.

So far, this is what "Understanding Imagine 2.0" says to do.  The
problem comes when I try to quickrender this from the stage.
It says
"Unable to load brush dh1:brushes/ptype.0005.0001"   It's looking up
the correct frame number, then trying to find the right brush, but
then it's sticking another .0001 on the end.

I tried quickrendering with the Action editor's "# of cycles to perform"
set to 1, then tried again with it set to 0, but no change.

Anyone know what this extra ".0001" is about??

Thanks for any help offered
Scott Krehbiel
[e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #42 ***************************************:-)

Subject: RE: SAVING MONEY ON PER-MADE 3D
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 16:41:23 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>

On Fri, 9 Sep 1994, Christopher Stewart wrote:

>      On Imagine related topics <grin>, I SAW THE LIGHT! I finally grasped
> an understanding of how bones work and have animated a complete figure
> with shoulder shrugs, the works. It's kind of hard to explain the concept

Good one! I did a shark that swims but I don't have a complete
understanding of bones...and the manual doesn't tell you much :(

MH





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #43 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Boons
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 14:28:24 +0200 (METDST)
From: Carsten Bach <[e-mail]>

I have used IM3.0 for some time, but the bonnes are still giving me a
hard time.

Some peopele have been talking about a tutorial for boons. So if anybody has
it please mail it to me, or if anybody has a good idea how to get started :)

I have tried to understand the manual but either my english is not good
enough :( or the manual has an approach that i don not understand :(

But i hope that someone can help me :)


Arne Voigt Denmark





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #44 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: animated brushmap trouble
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 12:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Hey Scott,

    Just set up a similar project in good old 2.0, and it did the
same thing to me.  The glitch seems confined to quickrender mode in the
Stage, since it doesn't seem to have any trouble generating the pix in
sequence in the Project Editor.

    Please excuse the simple-mindedness of this suggestion, but it's
the only thing I could do to make it quickrender:

    Rename all the pics in your animated brush pic directory, adding
a '.0001' to each one.  DOpus makes this easy, with the ole unix asterisk.
Then you can rename them again, removing what you added, when you're
ready to actually render the project.

    There are times when you really do need to see a quickrender, to
save time, so, when all else fails, try that rename trick.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #45 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: animated brushmap trouble
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 19:52:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Blaquiere <[e-mail]>

Scott,

there is a bug in Imagine 2.0 which causes the program to append the
brushmap's frame number twice, causing a "file not found" error.
This bug occurs when attempting a quickrender in the Stage editor.
You can get around it by rendering the frame from the Project editor; the
double frame number bug doesn't affect that module.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #46 ***************************************:-)



    id m0qjx3R-0006MJC; Sun, 11 Sep 94 18:07 EDT
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 18:07:20 +0100
From: Mark Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Help with fur or hair...
To: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>
Cc: Mailing List <[e-mail]>
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII



On Sat, 10 Sep 1994, Michael Hazlett wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 8 Sep 1994, Bush Doktor wrote:
>
> >
> >      Has anyone been able to recreate fur or hair in imagine?  I'm
> > trying to make a mane for a lion.  I've got everything else done,
> > but the mane is a killer.
> >
>
> Mate if you can find out how to do hair WOW! I mean I got Humanoid
> recently and I expected hair but...no so if you figure it out give us a
> yell :)
>
> MH
>
>
>
>

First, paint the hair image map using a 24-bit paint package like
brilliance, DPaintIV (HAM8), opal paint, etc. Save the image, then create
a second map using the image converted to 2 colors. For this image, make
sure that the background is completely white, the hair completly black.
Then save this image and load the first image into an image processor
program, or paint program that allows conversion to negative colors. Do
so, and save it as a third image. Using identical coordinates, map image
1 as a color map, image 2 as a filter map, and image 3 as an altitude
map. You may play with the Y coordinate on the altitude map (3) to
increase/decrease the depth of the hair. Filter maps can be flakey. You
may need more than one to make the background truly transparent. At least
in version 2.0.

 If you have the April 1993 issue of Amazing Amiga, there
is an article inside detailing the process I've just outlined. In the
article, the object was to create realistic grass on a 3-D lanscape in
Imagine, and it does appear to work, from the pics provided. It seemed to
me that hair would work just the same.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #47 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: animated brushmap trouble
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 22:39:36 +0059 (EDT)
From: "Mr. Scott Krehbiel; ACS (PC)" <[e-mail]>

On Sun, 11 Sep 1994, Mike McCool wrote:

> Hey Scott,
>
>     Just set up a similar project in good old 2.0, and it did the
> same thing to me.  The glitch seems confined to quickrender mode in the
> Stage, since it doesn't seem to have any trouble generating the pix in
> sequence in the Project Editor.
>
>     Please excuse the simple-mindedness of this suggestion, but it's
> the only thing I could do to make it quickrender:
>
>     Rename all the pics in your animated brush pic directory, adding
> a '.0001' to each one.  DOpus makes this easy, with the ole unix asterisk.
> Then you can rename them again, removing what you added, when you're
> ready to actually render the project.
>
>     There are times when you really do need to see a quickrender, to
> save time, so, when all else fails, try that rename trick.
>

Thanks for the info.  You're right, it renders from the Project editor
like a charm.  Though it's a perfectly rational workaround for this
bug, your solution strikes me as kinda funny.  (this is the FIRST frame
1.  This is the FIRST frame 2.  This is the FIRST frame 3.)  Man, talk
about having to force something to work.. :-)

Thanks for the help... now onward to fix my approach to this animation!

Scott Krehbiel



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #48 ***************************************:-)

Subject: RE: SAVING MONEY ON PER-MADE 3D
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 01:30:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> I SAW THE LIGHT! I finally grasped
> an understanding of how bones work and have animated a complete figure
> with shoulder shrugs, the works. It's kind of hard to explain the concept
> but I think I like it!
>                     Christopher

hehehee! well glad to hear it. Its a very powerful tool and works quite
well, once everything is properly setup. I like it too, and can think of
some really neat animations I can use it for.

=RRW=



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #49 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Bump maps on a cylinder.
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 12:55:41 +0100
From: MICHAEL RICHARDS <[e-mail]>

Dear All.

    From a read of the manual (it had to happen :) ), it seems
that I cannot have a repeating bump map pattern around the walls of
a cylinder. I am looking to add a series of tiles around the rim of a
cylindrical tower, and rather than build a large map (memory is really
tight) and trying to scale it to fit, I would rather stamp the same
pattern down repeatedly.

    Am I reading this right and it isn't possible to do this?

    If it is, has anyone else had the same problem and found a way
to get around it ?

    Email or reply here, thanks in advance.

                    Mike.

You can reach Mike Richards at the following   /@\            \|/
address ... (if you're that desperate).       `-\ \  ______  - 0 -
                                                 \ \/ ` /  \  /|\ _
            [e-mail]                        \_i / \  |\____//
                                                    | |==| |=----/
---- Why not drop me a line ...? -------------------hn/--hn/-----------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #50 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Adjusting lights in Amiga v3.0
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 94 11:54:59 GMT
From: Steven Cockrill <[e-mail]>

Hi there,

I can't make adjustments to beam widths etc. I'm using a point light
source set to round beam, but Stage won't let me adjust anything.
I could before... have I done something with prefs or presets?

'axes only' in the transformation requester is ghosted

I can scale all axes at once (it appears) but not individually.

I've tried 'shift' but nothing seems to make any difference to the
light lines.

Anyone know what I've done or haven't done or where to look? :)

thanks,

Steve


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #51 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: HELP WITH FUR OR HAIR.
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 22:23:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

12-SEP-1994 16:35:19.34
From:   IN%"[e-mail]"
To:     IN%"[e-mail]"
Subj:   RE: HELP WITH FUR OR HAIR.

>> There are some JPEG files over on Compuserve that feature
>> mythological creatures and a male jogger. I have yet to ask the renderer to
>> confirm this, but my suspicion is that they are image maps.

> That's me!  <g>

> The Jogger uses Image maps.  The mythological creatures all use textures...no
> image maps.  The hair on their heads, is done by applying the WRINKLED
> texture. If the Z axis goes through the tops of the head, the settings are
> something like z=10, x=.5, y=.5.  This will create long but thin wrinkles
> that look like clumps of hair strands. The fuzz on the bodies of the
> Centaur, Minotaur, and Satyr are done with the FUZZ.ITX.

> For a lion...the wrinkled texture would work very well.  In my example above,
> the Z axis should be rotated so it's almost perpendicular to the  orientation
> of the mane:
____
|    \
y___________\_____z        Acutally, should be rotated down from the Y
|       |     \            axis a bit.  Play with it.
|        \_____|
|
x

> Please repost to IML if you like.

> -GreG tsadilas

I didn't realize until I got offline that GreG had only sent this to me.
I am reposting it here for everyone's benefit.

***** Paul *****
[e-mail]

Without my ignorance, your knowledge would be meaningless.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #52 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Adjusting lights in Amiga v3.0
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 23:15:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Blaquiere <[e-mail]>

Are you sure you're on the right frame? In Stage, you must be in an
object's keyframe if you want the changes to stick. With the light, you
presumably want to set its axes on the frame where it first appears. Oh,
and you may want to <s>cale the <l>ocal axes, not world.



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #53 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Bump maps on a cylinder.
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 23:21:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Blaquiere <[e-mail]>

Michael,

I don't know if it has been cured in 3.0, but yes, previous versions of
Imagine would ignore the "repeat" button when the wrap mode was set to
anything other than FlatX/FlatZ. A quick solution: build a section of
your cylinder, just large enough for _one_ instance of your brush map.
Rotate the axes so that the local Y axis is the main axis of the
cylinder, then use Replicate (under Amiga-E, or Alt-E for PC owners) to
create as many additional copies as needed; enter #copies and appropriate
distance to make each copy abutt (sp?) the previous one exactly.

The only problem with this is, the seams between objects will show; you
may want to select all seam edges and "Make Soft" to ensure Phong shading
over the entire object and get rid of the seams.



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #54 ***************************************:-)

Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 13:28:37 +0800
From: Mark Johnson <[e-mail]>

Hi all,

Dose anyone have TypeSmith? I thought that if you had TypeSmith, you could
use your logo (as a picture) and tack it into typesmith. Then save it out
as a postscript font. Thus using it in the spline editor.
Anyone? Just a thougth
Mark J


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #55 ***************************************:-)

Subject: RE: SAVING MONEY ON PER-MADE 3D
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 94 23:49:10 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Christopher Stewart)

>On Fri, 9 Sep 1994, Christopher Stewart wrote:
>
>>      On Imagine related topics <grin>, I SAW THE LIGHT! I finally grasped
>> an understanding of how bones work and have animated a complete figure
>> with shoulder shrugs, the works. It's kind of hard to explain the concept
>
>Good one! I did a shark that swims but I don't have a complete
>understanding of bones...and the manual doesn't tell you much :(

     I was just being a goof and not realizing that the overlap (ie: tip
to tipall) was the way to limit the bend. I really mangled the first few tries
but am getting acceptable results now. Poly counts and object sizes are
certainly rising rapidly though, ouch!

                    Christopher



--
"I wish there was a knob on the TV             [e-mail]
 to turn up the intelligence.                  [e-mail]
 There's a knob called `brightness',           Christopher Stewart
 but it doesn't work." -- Gallagher            Animation/Graphic Arts/Telecomm


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #56 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Transparent objects
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 19:07:30 +1000 (EST)
From: Nikola Vukovljak <[e-mail]>

On Sat, 3 Sep 1994, Mr. Scott Krehbiel; ACS (PC) wrote:

>
> I forgot to mention in my last message that I'm using 2.0, and
> that my problem of transparent objects still showing up happens
> in scanline and in trace.  They show up as an odd, dingy grey-green
> over my grey background.  I have all attributes set to the
> defaults, except for filter values all at 255.  I'd like to make
> this thing completely dissapear, and any help would be appreciated.
>

Make sure that the specularity of the object is at 0. Also, no hardness
either.

Hope this helps.

Nik.
[e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #57 ***************************************:-)

Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 04:22:31 CDT
From: @sprill.demon.co.uk:[e-mail]

>From ![e-mail] Fri, 26 Aug 94 09:40:56 GMT
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 1994 18:09:05 -0600 (MDT)
Sender: Roger Straub <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Roger Straub <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
X-Status: OR
From: Steven Cockrill <[e-mail]>
From: Roger Straub <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Morph


Hi!

To morph between two objects with the same number of points and faces,
put the first object in frame 1 in Action. Add the second object on
frames 2-50 on the same actor bar, and VOILA! A morph! Hope this helps...

See ya,
    Roger



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #58 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Adjusting lights in Amiga v3.0
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 13:03:37 GMT
From: Steven Cockrill <[e-mail]>

Hi,

sorry folks, wasted time and bandwidth, I RTFM and now I understand :)

1. size is _not_ scale
2. size can _only_ be adjusted in the stage transformation requester?

Now I've got nice long thin light lines!

best wishes,

Steve


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #59 ***************************************:-)

Subject:       Re: Bump maps on a cylinder.
Date:          Tue, 13 Sep 1994 11:09:32 BRA3EST
From: "Daniel 'Mega'" <[e-mail]>

Charles wrote
> Michael,
>
> I don't know if it has been cured in 3.0, but yes, previous versions of
> Imagine would ignore the "repeat" button when the wrap mode was set to
> anything other than FlatX/FlatZ.
In the Bible, ie, "Understanding Imagine 2.0" Mr. Worsley says that
it's a BUG of Imagine.

Day Message: The first thing that a 3D artist says is:"fiat lux"

Daniel Bueno Bracher
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
Internet E-mail: [e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #60 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Black lines on reflective objects.
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 12:51:29 +1000
From: [e-mail]

Howdy all

Has anyone noticed black lines, like a ragged seam appear on reflective
objects when using a global map.This happens at certain angles and not
always in every frame ? I did see this happen every now and then in 2.0,
but it seems to be happening in 3.0 as well.Is there a preferred size for
an environment map- I normally use the same size image, as the image size
that I am rendering at ie 736 by 566.

Also when I run the bugfix Im3fixAm I get a message in the shell which says
- couldnt find patch pattern in Imagine .fp. ?

Any takers - must say I love 3.0 anyways.

See ya


David Haines
College of Fine Arts
Phone: +61 +2 +339-9555
Fax:   +61 +2 +339-9506





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #61 ***************************************:-)

Subject:       Re: Black lines on reflective objects.
Date:          Wed, 14 Sep 1994 16:46:23 GMT +1200
From: "Paul Batten" <[e-mail]>

> Has anyone noticed black lines, like a ragged seam appear on reflective
> objects when using a global map.This happens at certain angles and not
> always in every frame ? I did see this happen every now and then in 2.0,
> but it seems to be happening in 3.0 as well.

Yes, this happened to me as well. I've finally put it down to the way the
global map is wrapped around the stage. If the map doesnot wrap smoothly
black line(s) appear (in the reflection) where the edges fail to meet ( same
as the problem sometimes encounted when wrapping a map around a sphere). I
haven't had a chance to find a solution yet... anyone else got a answer ?

Cheers
Paul.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul Batten     Science & Computing Dept.    Christchurch Polytechnic
 [e-mail]           Christchurch      New Zealand
            TEL  [phone]            FAX  [phone]
----------------------------------------------------------------------




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #62 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Bump maps on a cylinder.
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 94 11:00:59 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Milan Polle)

Hi Michael,

While probably being obvious, you can make one ring of the texture and use
the repeat button to have it repeat vertically (I mean brush map ofcourse).
The repeat function works for the axis that is set to flat.

Hope this helps a bit.

Let your Imagination run wild,

Milan


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #63 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Things I want in IM4.0
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 94 11:16:24 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Milan Polle)

>Day Message: The first thing that a 3D artist says is:"fiat lux"

Strange, I don't remember saying that. (What does it mean anyway ?)

OIB:

My textures for clipmapping and brightnessmapping are all nice and well,
but I still want Clipmapping, Brightnessmapping and Specular mapping in 4.0.
(Or rather 3.2 :)

Da grtz, Milan


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #64 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Textures update
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 94 11:49:41 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Milan Polle)

Hi people,

I am hereby sending an update of the textures I sent
previously.
The clipmap and cliptran textures now have a backlight flag.
The starflare texture looks better and is bugfixed.
Also included is a docfile on the textures.
All the textures are for the 3.0 version of Imagine for the
Amiga (Sorry guys, I still haven't succeeded in compiling for
the pc)

Let your Imagination run wild,

Milan


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #65 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Textures.lha uuencoded Amiga IM3.0
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 94 11:50:15 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Milan Polle)

begin 777 textures.lha
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M#W0>X[\<T:=ZX-4&IN0CY8(C:)AV$NDYC:GM!]F[!.ILKAZA+6QH-2W9 P
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>HCDW8G03X[(^K$B)@NF>_$#8RV5:TRA8?L0GSJ

end


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #66 ***************************************:-)

Subject: seamless loop
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 11:07:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Hey y'all,

    Back to basics on this one.  I'm trying to make a simple movie of
a plane that orbits a revolving earth.  I'd like the thing to loop,
endlessly.

    I keep getting a little skip, or stutter, when the loop starts
over.  And when I let Imagine do it's looping anim thing, appending two
frames, it looks even worse.  The plane and the earth jump backwards.

    Only thing I haven't tried is starting the position and alignment
(for the plane following the path) at frame two, instead of frame one. I
always just start everything at frame one,--but then I've never needed a
seemless loop like this before.




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #67 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: HELP WITH FUR OR HAIR.
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 15:13:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Andrew P. Vogel" <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 12 Sep 1994 [e-mail] wrote:

> >> There are some JPEG files over on Compuserve that feature
> >> mythological creatures and a male jogger. I have yet to ask the renderer to

> >> confirm this, but my suspicion is that they are image maps.
Are these anywhere to be found on AmiNet?
If so, where, please?

========================================================================
Drew Vogel: Admissions Officer at University of Cincinnati Undergraduate
Admissions (call 800-827-8728), SysOp of The Cafe' BBS (513-232-4895)
FidoNet 1:108/245, Actor, director, Amiga fan, Imagine 3.0/LW 3.5 user,
vice-president of Ohio Valley Amiga Users' Group, documentation author,
single guy, and much, much more!         "The only way OUT is THROUGH."



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #68 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Bump maps on a cylinder.
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 16:56:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

>
> Charles wrote
> > Michael,
> >
> > I don't know if it has been cured in 3.0, but yes, previous versions of
> > Imagine would ignore the "repeat" button when the wrap mode was set to
> > anything other than FlatX/FlatZ.
> In the Bible, ie, "Understanding Imagine 2.0" Mr. Worsley says that
> it's a BUG of Imagine.

    And in the 3.0 Manual, Impulse says that you *can't* repeat
brushmaps (via 'repeat' box) on anything other than flat
wraps. So in a way it's a bug (it won't do what we want it to), and in
a way (a little more accurately) it's officially not a function...

                            J.---->
E-Mail: [e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #69 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: seamless loop
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 17:13:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

>
> Hey y'all,
>
>     Back to basics on this one.  I'm trying to make a simple movie of
> a plane that orbits a revolving earth.  I'd like the thing to loop,
> endlessly.
>
>     I keep getting a little skip, or stutter, when the loop starts
> over.  And when I let Imagine do it's looping anim thing, appending two
> frames, it looks even worse.  The plane and the earth jump backwards.

    Get even more basic.

    Use the FX Rotate2.0 to spin the plane around the world.
    The only thing you'd have to change is the parent axis of
the plane. Move the parent axis to the center of the Earth
(center of orbit), then move the plane itself to the edge of the
Earth (where it would be orbiting). Be sure the plane is oriented
correctly and spin the parent axis. The plane will now orbit the
Earth.
    If you need an elliptical orbit, well then, you must use a
path.
    Create a closed path and 'ellipticalize' (neat word, huh?) it
out. Position and align to path, then do a pencil test. If it stutters
here it'll stutter in the final run. It *should* work fine,
however. One thing to remember (pretty important) is that you should
*not* include your last frame. This is 'cause it's the same as your
first frame. I think... I'm pretty sure... I'm not at my trusty Amy to
check it out fer sure...
    As a last resort create an open path. Connect the first point
of the path with the last point (making sure to rotate the last point
180 degrees to match up). Do this via the transformation requester for
more accuracy (you already know that). Do the whole position,
aligning, and rendering thing again...
    If that doesn't work I'd suggest compiling the anim from
individual frames (use DPaint, the PD Rend24, or even better the PD
Makeanim). Create a looping frame animation.
    Good Luck!!!

    Gee it's good to be back again!!!

                            J.---->

E-Mail: [e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #70 ***************************************:-)

Subject: FEATURE FOR IMAGINE 3.1 or 3.2
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 94 18:25:30 EDT
From: "Steve J. Lombardi" <[e-mail]>

Impulse- Here is a quick little feature that would take only a few moments
of your coding time, but could save users HOURS!!!

In the detail editor I'd like a way to 'memorize' an object's axis
sizing and scaling information. another function would 'restore' the
previously memorized settings. In between a memorize and a restore I could
do all the twists, tapers, bends I could stand, manipulating the axis
every which way as needed. when I was done a hot key would restore
the original axis settings. This is important after placing and
animating an object in the stage and later needing to edit the object further.

this would save two trips into the transform requestor, writing down all of the
settings, and later typing them back in.

If it's too late for 3.1, I'd really like this in 3.2. Thanks for listening.

P.S.
Not to beat a dead horse, but with a robust arexx interface, users
could hack together a macro in a few minutes to do the above!! So
I guess this is also a plug for arexx.

saint lombo


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #71 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: seamless loop
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 17:02:57 -0600 (MDT)
From: Roger Straub <[e-mail]>

Have you tried turning off the spline motion scaling in Action? As far as
I understand it, the motion will taper off toward the end of the
movement. This might produce some "skipping" effeots.

See ya,
    Roger


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #72 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Looping Anim
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 94 20:56:11 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike Tucibat)

On 9-14, Mike McCool wrote:

M> Back to basics on this one.  I'm trying to make a simple movie of
M> a plane that orbits a revolving earth.  I'd like the thing to loop,
M> endlessly.
M>
M> I keep getting a little skip, or stutter, when the loop starts
M> over.  And when I let Imagine do it's looping anim thing, appending two
M> frames, it looks even worse.  The plane and the earth jump backwards.
======================

        Just a quick thought...

        If you have the start and end frames identical, you should
        only use eg. 29 of 30 frames for the anim.  And in that case,
        you wouldn't want to make a repeating anim.

        -mikeT



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #73 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Understanding3.X
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 94 18:30:00 PDT
From: [e-mail]

Does anyone know when Steve W's book Understanding Imagine 3.X is comming
out? I wrote him, but no response. Thanks!


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #74 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: FEATURE FOR IMAGINE 3.1 or 3.2
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 21:04:57 -0600 (MDT)
From: Douglas Rudd <[e-mail]>

>
>
> Impulse- Here is a quick little feature that would take only a few moments
> of your coding time, but could save users HOURS!!!
>
> In the detail editor I'd like a way to 'memorize' an object's axis
> sizing and scaling information. another function would 'restore' the
> previously memorized settings. In between a memorize and a restore I could
> do all the twists, tapers, bends I could stand, manipulating the axis
> every which way as needed. when I was done a hot key would restore
> the original axis settings. This is important after placing and
> animating an object in the stage and later needing to edit the object further.

>
Unless I'm missing something, it would seem the copy/paste functions
should work here. Copy your object, play with it, then if you don't
like the results (and can't get back with undo), delete it and paste
the original back.

Doug Rudd
[e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #75 ***************************************:-)

Subject: ReBoot
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 21:39:26 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Gary Beeton, [e-mail])

Greetings,

I just finished watching a TV show called ReBoot.  It is a half-hour kids show
produced *ENTIRELY* using 3-D CG animation.  The premise of the show is almost
identical to TRON, except there is no rotoscoping involved here.  They seem to
go out of their way to make it look CG, but they achieve some pretty good
organic effects too (including humanoid characters with credible facial
expressions).  I didn't manage to catch enough of the credits to determine the
computer platform or software they used, but I did note that it is produced in
Vancouver, Canada.  It plays Wednesday evenings on YTV (Canada). For those who
can, I highly recommend a watch.  Very Cool!!

Gary
[e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #76 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Australian Imagine Users....
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 15:18:42 +1000 (EST)
From: MiKE <[e-mail]>

Hi all,
    This is a quick message about an upcoming TV show on ABC TV which
is chocka full of Imagine Animation.

just a short note to let you know that "Going Walkabout in
Cyberspace" & the other microdocs screen nationally on ABC TV on
Wednesday September 28 at 9.30pm.

    Set the video!!  This animations in this doco were done using
Imagine2.0 and essence textures.  All post-production work was done on
Macs :(.  Produced directed by a bunch of guys/gals from Bris/Sydney.

    (Not to boast or anything, but the modelling of the satellite
orbiting around the globe was done on my very own 1200!)
later
MiKE (Cstar on #amiga)
                     Subvert the dominant paradigm.
  [e-mail]    http://www.uq.oz.au/mecheng/home/MiKE.html
 [Alternate: [e-mail]   [e-mail]]





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #77 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: FEATURE FOR IMAGINE 3.1 or 3.2
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 11:05:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

> >
> > In the detail editor I'd like a way to 'memorize' an object's axis
> > sizing and scaling information. another function would 'restore' the
> > previously memorized settings.
    Etc...

> Unless I'm missing something, it would seem the copy/paste functions
> should work here. Copy your object, play with it, then if you don't
> like the results (and can't get back with undo), delete it and paste
> the original back.

    I believe the original poster is alluding to the fact that
when doing certain things to objects, such as using deformations
(bend, taper, twist, stretch, pinch, etc), changes are affected based
on the object's axis. The poster wants, after using deformations, an
easy way to change *just* the axis back to its original values.
    For instance, take an object with an axis at world center
(0,0,0) and with size dimensions 32,32,32. This is the way a user
wants the object's axis to be at all times. The user also wants to
perform a deformation that requires the axis to be in a different
location (e.g. only the top third of the object is to be affected). To
do this, *only* the axis is moved to a new location (about a third of
the way from the geometric top of the object). It is then used to
deform the object. The user now needs that axis back in its original
position. Either you have a 'recall original values' function, which
the original poster suggested, or you do the slow (current) method of
remembering the original location, size, and alignment values, and
then apply them manually.
    Hope it clears things up a bit...

                            J.---->

E-Mail: [e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #78 ***************************************:-)

Subject: loopers
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 10:58:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Thanks, y'all, for all your advice on making a seamless loop.  Turns out
the problem may be my viewer.  I think it was J Goldman (thanks, mate)
who first suggested using an outside animator to compile all the rendered
frames.

    I usually do this anyway, with Buildanim, a GREAT pd animator.
But I always use Vutek to view the finished product, and no matter what I
did, it always skipped.

    So I tried using MainActor to compile the frames, then let it add
its loop frames as requested, then used its viewer to view the anim.
Voila.  No skip.  And interestingly enough, when I try viewing this
MainActor-compiled anim with Vutek, it SKIPS.

    Anyhow, thanks J Goldman, and Mike Tucibat and Bush Doktor, for
putting me on the right track.  All is now right with the world.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #79 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Black lines on reflective objects.
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 18:15:40 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail] (Christian Leyen)

Hi, I had the same problem some time ago.
This happens when you use a picture that doesn't "fill" all the columns
of its resolution. In some paint programs it is impossible (or difficult)
to access all the columns in an overscan image, so when you save the
picture, these columns are all black. When Imagine uses this picture as
a global brush, these black columns appear in the reflections.
One solution is to load the picture in an image proccessing program (ADpro,
ImageFX) and crop it to remove the black columns, and then save it again.

Christian Leyen ([e-mail])
~""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #80 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Forge and ESSTOIM29
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 22:56:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

Hi-  I own both essence packages as well as forge.  Forge loads e2 no prob,
but when i load any e1 textures (converted to .itx by esstoim29) it bags.
samewith im3.0 textures.  is there a patch program from apex to add the
neccessary information into the texture headers?  i should say that i purchased
e1 well over a year ago (ver. 1.1)  Perhaps an update disk?

Ideas?

Bob


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #81 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Australian Imagine Users....
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 23:37:46 -0400
From: Charles Blaquiere <[e-mail]>

Hmmm... "Going walkabout"... "Bris/Sydney"... I guess "ABC" would be the
_Australian_ Broadcasting Corporation, perhaps? I almost got a heart
attack before I realized the show you mention would be broadcast halfway
around the world from North America, where I am. Silly me -- and I
thought ABC (The American Broadcasting Companies) would devote an hour to
Imagine-filled virtual reality.



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #82 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: FEATURE FOR IMAGINE 3.1 or 3.2
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 23:46:06 -0400
From: Charles Blaquiere <[e-mail]>

Ahh, I see what the original poster wanted. This means my first (hasty)
reply is full of it. Let's try again.

Copy your object. Select all points (Amiga-3, Amiga-A) and delete
(Amiga-D). You are left with a lone axis, with all the settings you want
to come back to.

Paste your original object into the workspace. Move its axis,
transform/mangle it at will. When you are ready to bring back the
original axis:

Enter Pick Groups or Pick Objects mode (Amiga-1 or Amiga-2). Pick the
lone axis, then (using Shift to multi-select) pick your transformed
object. Join them (Amiga-J). Presto! all object data from your object is
glued onto the lone axis, forming a single object.

Isn't Imagine a powerful modeller?



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #83 ***************************************:-)

Date: Sat, 17 Sep 1994 03:49:54 +1000
From: [e-mail]

For those who are interested and have HTTP abilities for WWW.

I have done 3D renderings for Case Western Reserve University using Imagine
2.9.  Check out:   http://www.cwru.edu/

I also have my own home page with many inline images, and a page of other
renderings you can retrieve.

    Right now it is:  http://ins02132.ins.cwru.edu/

    but it will soon be http://sushi.ins.cwru.edu/

Note my own home page is usually unavailable from 8-5 EST.


--
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Michael Comet, [e-mail] - CWRU, Software Engineer/Graphics Artist |
| Computer Graphics/Animation! - HomePage: http://ins02132.cwru.edu/       |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #84 ***************************************:-)

Date: Sat, 17 Sep 1994 05:17:35 +1000
From: [e-mail]

On Thu, 15 Sep 1994, Mike McCool wrote:

>
>
> Anyone else getting mail bounced back from the list with the note 'Member
> unknown  jnunez'?
>
>     I don't know where this jnunez is coming from--and my messages
> still end up getting posted to the list, so they're getting through.  I'm
> also asking my local server.
>
>     Imagine related token:  showed a short morphing states anim at my
> local amiga user's group meeting last night, and had folks' tongues
> hanging out.  Some actually required medical attention . . .
>
>

    Yes... I get this too!

Unknown member [e-mail]... or somesuch.  It happens every time I
post to the list.

OIB:  I got the 'Imagine Companion 2.0' (electronic version) from Dave
Duberman.  It seems to have a lot of good tutorials... now if I can get
time to play with them :)  It's about 140 pp. printed out, with
screenshots and all.

    Ed

/****************************************************************************/
/* Ed Phillips  [e-mail]      University of Delaware       */
/* Jr Systems Programmer  [phone]    IT/Network and Systems Services */
/****************************************************************************/



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #85 ***************************************:-)

Date: Sat, 17 Sep 1994 05:42:18 +1000
From: [e-mail]

You have to get an upgrade to version 3.0 to allow Essence-I textures
to work in Forge.  Besides, a couple of the textures have been sped
up, and some bugs were squashed.
\KenR
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Live life to the max!  After all, you're dead a long time...
---------------------------------------------------------------------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #86 ***************************************:-)

Subject: loopers
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 94 22:01:00 -0100
From: [e-mail] (Torgeir Holm)

>I usually do this anyway, with Buildanim, a GREAT pd animator.
>But I always use Vutek to view the finished product, and no matter what
>did, it always skipped.

>So I tried using MainActor to compile the frames, then let it add
>its loop frames as requested, then used its viewer to view the anim.
>Voila.  No skip.  And interestingly enough, when I try viewing this
>MainActor-compiled anim with Vutek, it SKIPS.

Hi Mike, try pressing c while the anim is playing. This toggles the
skipping. Or you could type: VT Your.anim cont

Hope this helps.


Torge!r


[e-mail]

----
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   The BYTE Castle - 6988 3700 / 6988 4100 - Askim, Norway - Info-board    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #87 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: seamless loop
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 1994 22:57:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>
>     I keep getting a little skip, or stutter, when the loop starts
> over.  And when I let Imagine do it's looping anim thing, appending two
> frames, it looks even worse.  The plane and the earth jump backwards.

Try building the anim without the last frame.

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #88 ***************************************:-)

Subject: HALO AROUND LIGHT IN IMAGINE
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 94 21:46:00 EDT
From: "Steve J. Lombardi" <[e-mail]>

I'm trying to get a nice halo of light to appear around
a light in imagine. let me explain. the scene is pretty dark. just
some ambiant light. at one end of the room is a red emergency light
flashing. when the camera looks at the light, I want the area around the
light to glow.  I've tried a few things without getting nice
results. ANy suggestions?? If it helps, I've got the essence textures. thanks.

--
steve lombardi
[e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #89 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Imagine for Macs
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 1994 23:53:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

>> How come that Imagine isn't produced for the Macintosh...??

> Probably because the Mac has slow graphics [snip]

As opposed to the incredibly speedy IBM platform (for which there *is*
a version of Imagine?
We have Pentiums at work and they a slow and have blocky graphics.
It's probably the software, but they are supposed to be "showing off"
the Pentium's capabilities! (Yawn!)

Quicktime is a pretty lame way of comparing computer capabilities.
I've seen CD-ROM software that was produced for both platforms, and it
doesn't look any better on an IBM.

***** Paul *****
[e-mail]

(A)bort, (R)etry, (P)retend this never happened?


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #90 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: HALO AROUND LIGHT IN IMAGINE
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 1994 22:17:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Hey Steve,

    Seems like I got some pretty good 'glowy' effects, when I was
fiddling around with making neon tubing.  Lemme go see if I can find that
imp and look up what I did . . .

    OK, I found it.  I made my neon tube object a Light, made it
Bright, and I THINK I hauled its axis around, so the light would point
backwards, towards the wall on which it was mounted.

    No other lights in the room, or at least diminished ones.  When
rendered, the tube glowed, and made the wall behind it glow, too.  Don't
see why this shouldn't work for your glowing red light.

    Good luck.



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #91 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Imagine for Macs
Date:     Mon, 19 Sep 1994 01:24:23 -0400
From: Jason B Koszarsky <[e-mail]>

I agree that a big problem to be faced by a Mac-Version is
the interface of Imagine.  FOr it to be accepted on the Mac
platform, it must conform to their guidelines.

On a side-note, does the Amiga Imagine have its work area
displayed in some sort of window on the Imagine screen?
A gadgetless window at that.  I'm wondering because it is
possible to lose system requesters behind the Imagine
work area if you hit the requester's depth gadget.  If the
requester is near the title bar there is a 1pixel gap in
which you may be able to pull the requester back up front.
I don't lose them often, its only happened accidentally.
But it is annoying and has made me wonder if the work area
is a custom window rather than a screen that I thought it
was.

Jaeson K.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #92 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: HALO AROUND LIGHT IN IMAGINE
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 1994 00:31:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

>
>
>
> I'm trying to get a nice halo of light to appear around
> a light in imagine.


    There are several ways of doing this. The first method works
under IM2.0 and 3.0. It takes the most work, but looks terrific if
done correctly.
    The second method works under 2.0 and 3.0, and is
easier. 3.0's version looks better due to the textures involved.
    The third method works only under 3.0.

    I'll create an easy example, a simple lightbulb. Think 2D for
a bit, and remember that the visible lightsource described is the type
you'd see on film.
    What's a light look like? Well, there's a central disk of
light that seems to be a constant brightness, the bulb itself. As you
go further outward a secondary disk of light surrounds the central
disk. This the first halo. It is roughly twice twice the size of the
central disk. It fades out rather quicky. It's, essentially, the part
of the light that "burns" the film. Go further outward. There's a
second halo. It's very dim and eventually fades out. This halo varies
in size, but can usually be set to eight times the size of the
original disk. This is the halo that is create when the light is
dispersed by atmospheric conditions. So with that in mind.

--- METHOD #1 (The Pain in the A$s Radial Texture Method)

    Create a disk utilizing Imagine's standard Disk
parameters.
    Copy the disk and scale the new one by a factor of two.
    Copy the larger disk and scale the new one by a factor of
four. You should now have three disks of varying size.
    Position the disks so that the smallest is in front of the
middlesized. The middlesized is in front of the largest.

    Make the smallest disk Bright with a Color of
255,255,255. Also, make it a Lightsource.

    Apply Radial textures to the middlesized and largest disks.

    The middlesized disk should be Bright and have a color of
150,150,255. The Radial texture should be set so that the disk's
transparency is set to 0,0,0 at the center. Create a transition
distance over the radius of the disk so that transparency is
255,255,255 at the disk's edge. You want the disk's color to fade as
it moves toward the edge of the disk.

    The larger disk should be Bright and have a color of
255,255,255, and a Transparancy of 170, 170, 170. Set the Radial
texture so that the color fades to total transparency (255, 255, 255)
at the disk's edge.

    Transform the smallest disk's axis ONLY. Bring up the
Transformation Requester, and Rotate the Z axis 180 degrees. Select
the Transform Axis Only button and Perform. The disk's Y-axis should
be pointing exactly opposite the other disks' Y-Axis.

    Group the three disks together using the smallest disk as the
Parent. This is a basic "Light w/halo" object. When rendering it be
sure to always point the Y-axis at the camera. It's easy to do. Just
Align Y-axis to Track to Object Camera.

    Render that, and see what you get. In this example the
smallest disk acts like the bright lightbulb, the second disk acts
like the film burn area, and the third disk acts like the atmospheric
dispersion area. This object, being 2D, has some limitations.

    A primary limitation is that this object only works well in
Scanline situations. This is because in Trace Mode the two larger
Radial mapped spheres block the smaller disk's light travelling
backwards. To work around it create an axis, make it a Lightsource,
place it behind the larger disk, and group it to the smallest disk. It
isn't infallible, however...
    Experiment with values. The Color values given above were for
a standard high intesity lightsource. Always remember what your
lightsource would look like in the real world. In the case of a red
exit sign, make the Color values predominently red, and substitute a
polygon created "EXIT" object for the first disk. Or something like
that...


--- METHOD #2 (The Fog Method)

    Create a primitive sphere. Make it Bright with the Color
values 255,255,255.
    Copy the sphere and scale it slightly larger than the original
sphere primitive. Make this sphere a Fog object by experimenting with
Fog Length values. Color it as necessary.

    For those with Imagine3.0 assign the Ghost texture to the
foggy sphere.

    Experiment with values. I haven't actually tried this yet, but
it should work...

--- METHOD #3 (The Haze Method)

    Use Global FX Haze to fuzz up your exit sign.

    A note, however. I still can't get Haze to work
correctly. Yes, I've copied the texture from Disk #1,
etc. etc... Still no go... Any takers?


    That's about it, I guess. I'm sure there are many other
ways. In fact, another favorite is digitizing a lightsource and
creating a transparency map out of it. The map is then assigned to a
plane (or disk)...
    Experiment is the only solution to the halo-around-lightsouce
problem. I've just volunteered some jump off points of my own. Good
luck!!

                                J.---->

E-Mail: [e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #93 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re:  HALO AROUND LIGHT IN IMAGINE
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 94 12:55:29 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Milan Polle)

Hi Steve,

I am just working on a cool texture that does what you want, I think.
You can apply it to a cube for instance and it will draw a nice round
glow. I am now making a function that changes the glow as the camera
angle gets closer to the textures y-axis, so it will for instance
get brighter as the camera looks into the lightsource.
It isn't quite finished yet, but I am working on it.

Let your Imagination run wild,

Milan


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #94 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Advert: avalon.chinalake CDROM
Date: 19 Sep 94 14:09:31 EDT
From: John Foust - Syndesis Corporation <[e-mail]>

To: imagine

Syndesis Corporation announces the release of "Syndesis Avalon",
an exact CDROM snapshot of one of the Internet's most popular 3D
archives, known as "avalon.chinalake.navy.mil".

Syndesis Avalon contains hundreds of 3D models in various formats,
plus hundreds of 3D-related documents and utilities.

This is an ISO-9660 disc that can be accessed on any computer.
It has long ISO Level 2 filenames for the Amiga and Mac, as well as
Rock Ridge formatting that restores full Unix filenames on systems
that understand it, such as Linux.

This disc is an exact copy of the Internet site as of July 18, 1994.
No files have been added or removed.  (Unlike the Syndesis 3D-ROMs,
the 3D models on this disc are not pre-converted to other file
formats.  You'll also need decompression tools like 'compress',
'gzip', 'tar', etc. to use these files, just as if you accessed the
Internet site.)

Syndesis Avalon includes a printed catalog of the files, showing the
Unix filenames and the corresponding MS-DOS-like ISO-9660 filenames.
The price is $49.95.

Syndesis Corporation
235 South Main Street
Jefferson, WI 53549
[phone]
[phone] FAX
[e-mail]




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #95 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Advert: new 3D model CDROMs, 3D translat
Date: 19 Sep 94 14:11:27 EDT
From: John Foust - Syndesis Corporation <[e-mail]>

To: imagine

Announcing a spectacular demonstration of a new 3D translation
technology called InterChange...

The "Syndesis 3D-ROM Volume I" is a CDROM collection of more than
500 freely distributable 3D models, all present in AutoCAD DXF,
3D Studio, Wavefront .obj, Video Toaster LightWave and Impulse's
Imagine (PC/Amiga) formats.  It's also got more than 400 tileable,
wrappable texture maps in GIF, TIF and IFF-24 format.

"Syndesis 3D-ROM Volume I" includes 28 Viewpoint DataLabs demo models,
plus demo high-res humanoids from Imagination Works, and office
equipment models from Noumenon Labs, and household items from VRS
Media, and digitized models from Mira Imaging, and animations
demonstrating the first set of IPAS routines for 3D Studio from the
Yost Group.

"Syndesis 3D-ROM Volume II" is an entirely new collection of more
than 200 new models, each pre-translated to five formats like the
first 3D-ROM.

"Syndesis 3D-ROM Volume II" also includes the five Siggraph 93 demo
models from Viewpoint DataLabs, plus the demo version of trueSpace
for Windows from Caligari Corporation, plus the demo version of
Visual Reality for Windows from Visual Software, plus the demo
version of RenderWare for Windows from Criterion Software Ltd.

We give away hundreds of copies of each 3D-ROM to those people who
contribute models for the next edition of the disc.  If you send us
one or more 3D models that we can include on the next 3D-ROM, and we
use your models on that disc, you get a free copy of that disc.  Ask
us for a submission form.

The Syndesis 3D-ROMs are ISO-9660 discs, fully accessible from
MS-DOS, Macintosh, Amiga and Unix workstations.  Each includes a
fully indexed, categorized and cross-referenced catalog of the
objects complete with thumbnail renderings.  Each 3D-ROM is $99.95.

The Syndesis 3D-ROMs are a demonstration of the translation abilities
of InterChange, Syndesis Corporation's system for converting between
3D file formats.  InterChange translates between AutoCAD DXF, 3D
Studio, Wavefront, LightWave, Imagine, Swivel, Sculpt, Sense8,
CAD-3D, RenderWare, Alias polyset, Vista DEM and many other file
formats.  All material and hierarchy information is preserved as best
as possible.  InterChange is available for Microsoft Windows and
Amiga computers.  InterChange for Windows is $495.

If you'd like to find out about InterChange and our CDROMs, we'd be
glad to add you to our mailing list.  Our catalog includes more
information about InterChange as well as thumbnail renderings of all
the models on the 3D-ROMs.  Drop us an e-mail with your snail-mail
postal address, and tell us which 3D programs you use, and which
file formats you need to translate.

Syndesis Corporation
235 South Main Street
Jefferson, WI 53549
[phone]
[phone] FAX
[e-mail]




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #96 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Imagine for Macs
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 94 18:36:00 -0100
From: [e-mail] (Torgeir Holm)

>On a side-note, does the Amiga Imagine have its work area
>displayed in some sort of window on the Imagine screen?
>A gadgetless window at that.  I'm wondering because it is
>possible to lose system requesters behind the Imagine
>work area if you hit the requester's depth gadget.  If the
>requester is near the title bar there is a 1pixel gap in
>which you may be able to pull the requester back up front.
>I don't lose them often, its only happened accidentally.
>But it is annoying and has made me wonder if the work area
>is a custom window rather than a screen that I thought it
>was.

You're absolutely right. The work area is a window. If you lose a
requester behind this window, you will lock up the program until you
get the requester back :(

If you use the commodity Yak, you will be able to send the work area to
the back with a LMB->RMB mouseclick. This will get you your requesters
back.

BTW: Try resizing the work area with DragIt4, works just like any other
window. ecept that the contents are cropped, not scaled.


Torge!r


[e-mail]

----
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   The BYTE Castle - 6988 3700 / 6988 4100 - Askim, Norway - Info-board    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #97 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Imagine for Macs
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 1994 14:11:16 -0600 (MDT)
From: Douglas Rudd <[e-mail]>

They will get my Amiga from me when they pry it out of my cold dead
hands.

Seriously, my Amigas are having no problems keeping up with the PCs.
My A2000/040-33mhz leaves my 486DX2/50 in the dust. I think the real
problem here is for Impulse to keep Imagine on track for two platforms.
Porting to more will make that even more difficult. Already, we see
divergence - Imagine PC can import/export different files. Essence is
available only for the Amiga version.

At least both versions look alike and to some extent, function alike.
Throw a bad apple into the works, and we'll have a new "look&feel",
QT anims, and a $2500 price tag (otherwise, Mac users won't buy it -
remember Sculpt 3D?).

You can bet the Mac people will feel no comradery with the PC Imagine
users, and won't even acknowledge the existence of an Amiga version.


Doug Rudd
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Amiga Guide to the Galaxy refers to Commodore's management as
"A bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first to be lined up
against the wall and shot when the revolution comes."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #98 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: HALO AROUND LIGHT IN IMAGINE
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 1994 17:36:46 -0600 (MDT)
From: Roger Straub <[e-mail]>

On Sun, 18 Sep 1994, Steve J. Lombardi wrote:

> I'm trying to get a nice halo of light to appear around
> a light in imagine. let me explain. the scene is pretty dark. just

Hi, Steve!

If you're using Imagine 3.0  you can use the Sparkle texture. If you've
downloaded Milan's textures (BTW, Thanx, Milan!) there is one itx in
there that is useful, but my memory fails me as to the name. I don't have
essence, so I don't know what there might be in there. Hope this helps...

See ya,
    Roger


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #99 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Brush Maps on Subgroups
Date:    Mon, 19 Sep 94 16:38 PDT
From: Michael North                        <[e-mail]>

Both 3dModeling Lab and Understanding Imagine say that you can apply
 a brush map to a subgroup of picked faces, but I can't seem to get
the PC version of Imagine 2.0 to do this.  I go into Pick Faces, pick
some, make them a subgroup and then give the subgroup a name.  Then,
when I try to pick that subgroup, the requestor pops up with a mangled
version of the name I so carefully chose (like "ee" for "cheek") and
all the options but the first three grayed out.  I am following the
directions in UI letter for letter as far as I can tell, and it just
seems that the PC Imagine 2.0 won't let me do what I'm trying to do.
Is there a bug here, a limitation in 2.0 or the PC version, or am I
doing something wrong?


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #100 ***************************************:-)



    id m0qmtcb-0006MIC; Mon, 19 Sep 94 21:03 EDT
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 1994 21:03:49 +0100
From: Mark Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Imagine for Macs
To: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>
Cc: Soren Wind <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9409192151.A6675-0100000@atc>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

I reference to Photoshop, which is basically an image processor, I
believe Imagemaster DOES have a lens flare feature. And Imagemaster R/T
is like $69.00 via mail order right now, but older versions do it also.



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #101 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Imagine for Macs
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 1994 23:39:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (David Wyand)

Hi Jason!

>On a side-note, does the Amiga Imagine have its work area
>displayed in some sort of window on the Imagine screen?
>A gadgetless window at that.  I'm wondering because it is
>possible to lose system requesters behind the Imagine
>work area if you hit the requester's depth gadget.  If the
>requester is near the title bar there is a 1pixel gap in
>which you may be able to pull the requester back up front.
>I don't lose them often, its only happened accidentally.
>But it is annoying and has made me wonder if the work area
>is a custom window rather than a screen that I thought it
>was.

It would appear that the Imagine interface is located inside of a normal
window that is lacking close of sizing gadgets.  All they would ahve to
do is to make the window a backdrop one, just like you can with the
Workbench in 2.0 and above.  That way nothing can go behind it, even if
you press the go-to-back gadget of another window.  Easy fix.

                                        -Dave
                                         [e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #102 ***************************************:-)

Subject: HALO AROUND LIGHT IN IMAGINE
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 1994 23:35:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (David Wyand)

Hi Steve!

>I'm trying to get a nice halo of light to appear around
>a light in imagine. let me explain. the scene is pretty dark. just
>some ambiant light. at one end of the room is a red emergency light
>flashing. when the camera looks at the light, I want the area around
the
>light to glow.  I've tried a few things without getting nice
>results. ANy suggestions?? If it helps, I've got the essence textures.

Two ways of doing this come to mind:  You could use the Lens Flare
effect that comes with Imagine 3.0 or use a fog object.

LENS FLARE: Just disable the flaring and have only the halo turned on.
Easy.

FOG:  Make a fog sphere the colour you want the halo.  Apply the Ghost
texture.  Adjust the sphere size and the ghost parameters until you get
what you want.  I prefer this method as I feel that you get more control
and you don't have to spend time post-processing.

All questions are welcomed...

                                        -Dave
                                         [e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #103 ***************************************:-)

Subject: re- kinematics.
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 94 16:44:41 EST
From: [e-mail]

Howdy all,

Has any one done any work with inverse kinematics yet ! I have started to
muck about with it and it does seem to be working, however if some one
feels that they have any gems they'd like to share, I am sure everyone
would appreciate it, as the read me file that came with the prog, is oh so
thin on detail.

Bye the way, my global haze does not seem to work. Just a plug for those
textures that apeared on the list they are awesome !


David Haines
College of Fine Arts
Phone: +61 +2 +339-9555
Fax:   +61 +2 +339-9506





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #104 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Imagine on Mac
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 1994 09:13:38 -0600 (MDT)
From: Douglas Rudd <[e-mail]>

Snip
> that they are a lame. I am an Imagine user, Imagine is ... good, but
> I am learning LightWave, and realizing that Imagine is ... avarage.
> In fact when I master LightWave I'll keep Imagine sleeping on my HD.
>
Yes. LW is very good. I've been using it for a little over a month
now. The rendering engine and its environment put Imagine to shame.
BUT- LW's Modeler leaves much to be desired. I wouldn't use it at all
if it were not for Metamorph. Imagine's Detail editor offers (to me)
a much greater and more positive control. Applique is far better than
Modeler's displacement map and there are no "states" in LW. LW does
a great job of tacking down brushes, but beyond that, I have found
little control over brushes and textures (well, these are not in
Modeler, but in LW).

My point: Use LW to render. Use Imagine to model and convert the object
to LW format. It works for me. (Oh yes, Imagine lacks one other LW
"feature". A dongle.)

Doug Rudd




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #105 ***************************************:-)

Subject: LW<>IM Conversion (was: Imagine on Mac)
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 1994 13:55:52 -0500 (CDT)
From: Michael Whitten <[e-mail]>

>Yes. LW is very good. I've been using it for a little over a month
>now. The rendering engine and its environment put Imagine to shame.
>BUT- LW's Modeler leaves much to be desired. I wouldn't use it at all
>if it were not for Metamorph. Imagine's Detail editor offers (to me)
>a much greater and more positive control. Applique is far better than
>Modeler's displacement map and there are no "states" in LW. LW does
>a great job of tacking down brushes, but beyond that, I have found
>little control over brushes and textures (well, these are not in
>Modeler, but in LW).
>
>My point: Use LW to render. Use Imagine to model and convert the object
>to LW format. It works for me. (Oh yes, Imagine lacks one other LW
>"feature". A dongle.)
>
>Doug Rudd

So what does everyone recommend for accurately converting Imagine objects
back and forth with Lightwave's?


best wishes,

Michael

 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 +    M.D. Whitten   [e-mail]    Sentience is overrated.   +
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #106 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Where are the Archives?
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 94 15:38:00 PDT
From: [e-mail]

The IML archies are stored at aminet sites.
For example, ftp.wustl.edu and ftp.cdrom.com

They are in located in pub/aminet/gfx/3d.
\KenR
***********************************************************************
It's not how you say it, it's when you say it.
***********************************************************************


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #107 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Everything about Motion Blur
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 94 17:45:15 MDT
From: "Mark Allan Fox" <[e-mail]>

Greetings:

        I've recently came back from summer holidays.  I
noticed (in the last 700 messages) that their was some
discussion of motion blur.  I thought that I would devulge
the information I know about this subject as well as why I
sincerly doubt that Impulse will include this feature in any
of the upcoming upgrades.  I will also give some hints as to
how to simulate motion blur (actually it really isn't
simulating, it's the real thing) using Imagine (or any other
rendering program for that matter) and an image processing
package.


Motion Blur - What is it?  How do we get it?

        The human eye does not see motion as most computer
renderers see it.  The human eye does not see motion as a
continuous set of instantaneous pictures.  The human eye
sees motion through persistence of vision.  Our eyes are
constantly taking visual data from our surroundings, the
data our eyes feed to our brains is not sampled.

        This is a difficult effect to achieve on the computer.
There are algorithms that allow a  computer to achieve real
motion blur, but these tend to be really slow if your using a
large number of polygons.  They get even more complex, and even
slower, if you start moving objects along spline paths.  (If
your interested, and have access to a good library, check out
Computer Graphics, Volume 17, Number 3, July 1993, _Temporal
Anti-Aliasing in Computer Generated Animation_.)  Much faster
ways of approximating motion blur exist.  These approximations
hide some of the temporal-aliasing (aliasing over time) while
the real motion blur method completely eliminates it.

        Some programs use a method much like the way Imagine
casts multiple rays while ray-tracing to eliminate regular
(spacial) aliasing.  This method is called distributed
ray-tracing.  While Imagine (3.0) can cast many rays through
the area of a pixel to approximate the pixel's average color
value, motion blur casts many rays over time through the area
of a pixel to determine that pixel's average color value.  (Note
that both methods can be combined without necessarily increasing
the rays cast.  Realistically the number of rays should be
increased, perhaps by a factor of two, because when combined
the two methods tend to have a negative impact on each other's
approximations.)

        Distributed ray-tracing is fairly easy to implement
_when ray-tracing_.  It becomes infinitely more difficult when
using a scanline renderer.  (So difficult, in fact that I won't
even discuss it.)


Motion Blur - Why Impulse probably won't implement it?

        As pointed out above, motion blur is hellishly hard to
implement in scanlining (because scanlining does hidden
surface removal on a line, actually a plane, that passes
through a row of pixels).  I'm sure that this method can, and
has, been implemented, but by a company much larger and richer
than Impulse (like Pixar).

        Problems exist in the distributed ray-tracing method
as well.  For this method to work it must have information
about every objects position over time (or at least the
frame to be traced and the two adjacent frames).  Imagine's
global effects are given access to much information about a
_single frame_, and they can be used to control the renderer
(as in depth of field), but I'm guessing that they can't
access anything but the information about the current frame.
So, Impulse would have to over-haul Imagine to implement
motion blur.  If you look at versions 2.0, 2.9, 3.0 and soon
3.1, you'll notice that almost all the new features are
add-ons and really aren't integrated into imagine as a whole.
It's great that Impulse planned far enough ahead to allow
Imagine to be so modular that these new features are just
added-on.  Unfortunately, I really don't think Imagine's
modularity goes far enough to allow an easy addition of
motion blur.  So until Impulse completely rebuild
s Imagine (something, I for one, think is due) I sincerely
doubt that we will see motion blur in Imagine.  Of course I
sincerely hope that I am absolutely wrong in the above and
that Imagine isn't designed the way I think it is, then
perhaps we might see motion blur in one of the next few
updates.


Motion Blur - How do I do it on my own?

        Motion blur is quite easy to approximate on your own.
However, it does have costs, namely, increased rendering time
(everyone knew that one was coming), and an increase in storage
space for the individual frames before they are compiled into
an animation.  There is a slight increase in the space the
animation will take too.

        Simply put to acheive motion blur render more frames
than you actually need.  So, depending on the amount and speed
of the motion in an animation, you render perhaps 3 times as
many frames as you want to be in your animation.  So if you have
a 10 second animation (300 or 240 frames) render 900 or 720
frames.  Then use an image processing package to average 3 frames
into one.  So for frame 1 in the animation you will average
frames 1,2 and 3.  (DTA does this on the PC.  The command for
compiling the above example into an FLC file would be
<dta pic*.tga /a3>.)

        The real trick here is to figure out how much motion
blur you need, if you need it at all.  Generally, I find that
if an object moves across the whole screen in one frame I will
want about 30 sub-frames per frame (big hint:  avoid the above
case.)  So if it moves across half the screen I will want about
15 sub-frames per frame.  It's also nice to always use an odd
number of sub-frames.  That way you know the objects exact
location at any given frame (in the middle sub-frame).

        Another problem arises when working on looping
animations.  The first and the last frame will not look correct.
What you have to do is tack on some extra frames before the first
and after the last frames.  The number you add depends on the
number of sub-frames you are using.  If N is the number of
sub-frames you are using you have to add (N/2)-1 frames to each
end of the animation.  You then have to set up in the action
editor so that the first (N/2)-1 frames look like the last (N/2)-1
frames and vice-versa.

         Sometimes you have a scene where motion blur is only
needed for a few frames or to one degree or another.  This is
where scene planning comes into play.  Personally I haven't had
enough practice in doing this to tell anyone how to achieve this.
I have had some success at this, I just haven't yet realised a
good method of approaching the problem.  A good work around is to
plan your camera angles so that you cut from one degree of motion
blur to another when the camera changes views.  If you have no
choice but to have one consistent camera angle then start drawing
time-lines, make lots of copies of the whole project (one for
each degree of blur), and think hard about what your going to do
before commiting yourself to the final render.  Of course if you
have a Pentium 100 and a couple gigabytes of hard drive space you
may be able to use brute force and just do everything at the
maximum needed degree of blur.  (Not recommended, as you'll save
yourself more time by setting up everything the hard (or is that
the easy) way, especially if this is a long animation.)

        If you have more interests in motion blur try Computer
Graphics: Principles and Practice, Fundamentals of 3D Computer
Graphics, the comp.graphics, comp.graphics.algorithms,
newsgroups, or contact me.


                        Mark A. Fox
                        [e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #108 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: LW<>IM Conversion (was: Imagine on Mac)
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 1994 22:24:09 -0600 (MDT)
From: Douglas Rudd <[e-mail]>

> So what does everyone recommend for accurately converting Imagine objects
> back and forth with Lightwave's?
>
>
> best wishes,
>
> Michael
>
I use Interchange and have had good results to date.

Doug Rudd
[e-mail]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Amiga Guide to the Galaxy refers to Commodore's management as
"A bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first to be lined up
against the wall and shot when the revolution comes."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #109 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Logo Sizes in Stage
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 18:06:39 +0000
From: David Shaw <[e-mail]>

Hi everyone!

    I was just curios as to what eveyone else uses for sizes of logos
etc in the stage editor for the bread-butter type animations.

    I average each letter at about 32 units high, and have my main
light set to 'controlled fall off' with the light settings at about 400.

    If any one has a better variation on this I'd be interested in
hearing how you set yours up.

    Also I was wondering how many others manual for 3.0 has pictures
that are too dark to see?

see ya
David Shaw




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #110 ***************************************:-)

Subject: bones tute?
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 19:40:43 +1000 (EST)
From: MiKE <[e-mail]>

Hi all,
    I've finally had a little time to devote to looking at Imagine3.
    The explanation of bones in the book is baffling at best.  I had
previously saved the bones tutorial someone posted here, but it got lost
in a mail shuffle :(
    Would some kind soul redirect me to its whereabouts? Thanks.

PS If anyone knows how to quiz the imagine mail server for info (ie a user
list) could they also drop me a line.
MiKE (Cstar on #amiga)
                     Subvert the dominant paradigm.
  [e-mail]    http://www.uq.oz.au/mecheng/home/MiKE.html
 [Alternate: [e-mail]   [e-mail]]





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #111 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Logo Sizes in Stage
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 06:24:43 -0500
From: gregory denby <[e-mail]>

David Shaw writes:
>   I was just curios as to what everyone else uses for sizes of logos
&
>   I average each letter at about 32 units high, ....

Flying or even standing Logos need the same consideration as anything
else rendered/animated in Imagine.  A common problem is flickering and
jaggies especially caused when small straight features are rotated away
from the horizontal or vertical plane.  The details of thin fonts, or
the bevels applied to letter objects can often wink in and out while
sweeping across a scene.

For the above reasons I like to make my word objects rather large and
simple, without too much extrusion to avoid background clutter.  Usually
I have letters more around 100 units high, in an environment 1000s of
units across.  I usually make my main light fairly large, around 600-800.
Then I add a number of smaller lights to bring out shaded areas and
provide glints just where I want them.  The controlled fall-off feature
really helps with this.

(the world size then needs to be set to zero, of course.)

Hope this helps, David.

To all:  I got a note from Mike Halvorson about Re: Imagine for Macs.
Thanks for listening Impulse!  To summarize, there is no intention to
add support for the Mac, because that would slow down development.
Mr M. is keenly aware of the dissatisfaction with slow releases, and
vows not to let it happen again.

So, yeah, Imagine has a bit of catch up to do.  Looks like they are
up and running. :-)

Greg Denby
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #112 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Lighting (Logo Sizes in Stage)
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 94 07:21:00 PDT
From: [e-mail]

David Shaw wrote,
>        Also I was wondering how many others manual for 3.0 has pictures
>  that are too dark to see?

To ensure that your pictures are not too dark to see, try fiddling
with the Global light settings in the Action Editor.  Depending on
the effect, I usually make my ambient light about 75 to 150 units
per R, G, and B.  Remember. though, that the higher the ambient light,
the "flatter" your picture will look.

Using black backgrounds will cause your picture to look fairly dark as
well.  You can try using a Global brush map or backdrop to provide
contrast for your rendered objects.
\KenR
******************************************************************
                          Space is big,
                          Space is dark,
                          It's hard to find
                          A place to park.
******************************************************************


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #113 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Logo Sizes in Stage
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 18:59:43 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Jon Bagge <[e-mail]>

Does it really matter how large objects are in imagine?  In units I mean?

If I have two identical objects, one 100 units and one 500 units, can't I
just adjust the camera and lighting and they will look the same?

:-Jon



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #114 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Lighting (Logo Sizes in Stage)
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 12:46:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

>
> David Shaw wrote,
> >        Also I was wondering how many others manual for 3.0 has pictures
> >  that are too dark to see?
>
> To ensure that your pictures are not too dark to see, try fiddling
> with the Global light settings in the Action Editor.  Depending on
> the effect, I usually make my ambient light about 75 to 150 units
> per R, G, and B.  Remember. though, that the higher the ambient light,
> the "flatter" your picture will look.

    Actually, I think he meant the Imagine3.0 Manual itself. Yes,
my manual's photos/images are too dark in some instances. That's
partly due to the type of paper it's printed on, I think...

                            J.---->

E-Mail: [e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #115 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Quickrender versus Project
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 10:27:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Hey y'all,

    Anybody got any idea what the parameters/globals etc are for
quickrender?  I can find the background color and light intensity, but
I'm curious why my quickrender looks so drastically different from the
real thing.

    All the objects are there, of course.  But textures change.  I
don't mean added textures, I mean just the look of the objects.

    Here's what I'm doing.  Someone's query about glowing halo
effects around lights made me dig out my old neon tubes projects.  I have
a neon sign glowing against a wall.  The wall's just the default
plane object, no fiddling with the attributes, everything standard.

    In the quickrender, the white backdrop wall takes on the glow of
the neon, and it has a nice grainy appearance, like sand.  How come, to
get this same nice soft grainy look in the project editor, I have to go
back in and re-attribute my wall with some added texture or brushmap?

    If I leave it at default, it looks completely different in the
actual render, from how it looked in Quickrender.  You know, that weird
wave-banding across the object, like a bleached rainbow . . .

    Thanks folks, for your attention.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #116 ***************************************:-)

Subject: particles
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 94 16:25:24 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Milan Polle)

Hmmmm,

while searching for a solution I realise you cannot make a
snapshot of a particle object to get a swarm of objects.
Argh, just not my lucky day, I guess.

Milan


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #117 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Lighting in the manual
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 15:54:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rob Freundlich <[e-mail]>

>>
>> David Shaw wrote,
>> >        Also I was wondering how many others manual for 3.0 has pictures
>> >  that are too dark to see?
>>
>> To ensure that your pictures are not too dark to see, try fiddling
>> with the Global light settings in the Action Editor.  Depending on
>> the effect, I usually make my ambient light about 75 to 150 units
>> per R, G, and B.  Remember. though, that the higher the ambient light,
>> the "flatter" your picture will look.

>    Actually, I think he meant the Imagine3.0 Manual itself. Yes,
>my manual's photos/images are too dark in some instances. That's
>partly due to the type of paper it's printed on, I think...

Well, even so, I've found that if you fiddle with the RGB values of your
world's lighting, you can really improve the darkness of the pictures in the
manual.  For example, I set my desk lamp's values to 255,255,255 (blindingly
bright).  If I then stare at the lamp for a while, everything begins to go
black.  Then when I look at the pictures in the manual, they don't seem nearly
as dark anymore.  Of course, it takes a few hours for my eyesight to return to
normal, but who ever said reading manuals was *easy* ?!?!?

ObSmileyForTheHumorImpaired :-)

---
Rob Freundlich, Senior Software Engineer | Some folks you don't have
IDX Systems Corporation                  | to satirize, you just quote 'em.
                                         | - Tom Paxton, from "A Folk
Amiga 4000/040.  deal with it.           |        Singer's Guide to Usenet"


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #118 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Imagine bug :(
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 94 16:17:01 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Milan Polle)

Hi people,

I have found some irritating things in Imagine 3.0:

- Objects used as particles loose their textures.
- Lockstated particle objects loose their textures
  (only one color per particle remains)

Seems like Imagine could do with a third party particle program?

Also I found a bug:

try to make a mathematical pyramid: add primitive sphere with
3 circle sections and 1 vertical section, hit ok, and render
a flashing guru mediation.
Well, enough complaining, just too bad about the particles, I
was making an awesome Disney effect that won't be possible now.

Milan


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #119 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Quickrender versus Project
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 13:13:27 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Gary Beeton, [e-mail])

>...
>    In the quickrender, the white backdrop wall takes on the glow of
>the neon, and it has a nice grainy appearance, like sand.  How come, to
>get this same nice soft grainy look in the project editor, I have to go
>back in and re-attribute my wall with some added texture or brushmap?
>
>    If I leave it at default, it looks completely different in the
>actual render, from how it looked in Quickrender.  You know, that weird
>wave-banding across the object, like a bleached rainbow . . .


This sounds like it may just be a "feature" of the software you are using to
display your renderings.  If you render using more colours than your display
can handle then the display software can do one of two things:  1) It can
assign all colours within a certain band to one of the colours it can display,
or 2) It can dither the display to simulate the desired colour.

The first method will produce "that weird wave-banding" effect, so I suspect
the software you are using to display your Project renderings does not dither.

I think(?) Imagine's Quickrender displayer uses dithering.  Dithering applies
a pattern of colours to a block of pixels in order to simulate colours that
could not otherwise be displayed.  If you are far enough away from the block,
your eye can no longer detect the pattern and your mind merges it into a solid
colour.  The problem with dithering is that you must sacrifice spatial
resolution to gain colour resolution, which can result in a grainy appearance
(which, by accident in this case, is the effect you desire).

I would recommend you try some other display software.  If you have an image
processor like ADPro you can control the method and degree of dithering used.

Hope I'm not too far out to lunch on this.

Gary
[e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #120 ***************************************:-)

Subject:  re:Quickrender versus Project
Date:  Wed, 21 Sep 1994 15:59:00 -0400
From: "rob (r.d.) hounsell" <[e-mail]>

In message "Quickrender versus Project", '[e-mail]' writes:

>    If I leave it at default, it looks completely different in the
>actual render, from how it looked in Quickrender.  You know, that weird
>wave-banding across the object, like a bleached rainbow . . .

  Sounds like a dithering issue.

Rob
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Rob Hounsell                           Internet: [e-mail]            |
| Team Leader: UNIX                      PHONE: [phone]                |
| DMS System Performance Development     ESN: 395-2904                        |
| Dept. 7D23                             Bell Northern Research               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #121 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Quickrender versus Project
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 21:59:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Hey Beeton, et al,

    As I'm never outsite Imagine when I'm experiencing this problem,
I can assume it's not the fault of an outside display program.

    Though two responses did seem to have one thing in common:
dithering.

    My next attempt at figuring this thing out is going to be to
reconfigure my Quickrender format, so it will yield an image the same
size as I'm rendering in the Project Editor.

    Thanks anyway, folks, for your attention.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #122 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Logo Sizes in Stage
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 07:15:35 CET
From: cjo <[e-mail]>

David Shaw wrote;
  >Also I was wondering how many others manual for 3.0 has pictures
  >that are too dark to see?

Yes, yes, yes. They are horrible. It seems that my manual came straight from
the xerox-machine!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|   Conny Joensson   |   Swedish Space Corp. Esrange            |
|   Kiruna           |   Satellite operations - Telecom Div.    |
|   Sweden           |   [e-mail]              |
-----------------------------------------------------------------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #123 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Bones tute?
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 08:39:31 +0100 (CET)
From: [e-mail]

Hello everybody,

I'll have a look at my archive of August. It might be in there.

Anyone wanting archives in Amigaguide format which is sorted on Subject, for
easy reading?
Just drop me a line. I've 45-52(aug).

Greetings Joop
[e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #124 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Lighting (Logo Sizes in Stage)
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 01:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>     Actually, I think he meant the Imagine3.0 Manual itself. Yes,
> my manual's photos/images are too dark in some instances. That's
> partly due to the type of paper it's printed on, I think...

Well, it could also be they did use copies of the images. Sure looks like
it to me.

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #125 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Quickrender versus Project
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 01:09:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>
>     If I leave it at default, it looks completely different in the
> actual render, from how it looked in Quickrender.  You know, that weird
> wave-banding across the object, like a bleached rainbow . . .

Hmmm. Not sure but sounds like its a lighting problem. You could set up a
light set and use it rather than the defualt light in the quickrender.
This will of course slow your quickrenders a bit, but probably give you a
better representation of what you will get in the stage or action editors.

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #126 ***************************************:-)

Subject: re:Quickrender versus Project
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 01:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> In message "Quickrender versus Project", '[e-mail]' writes:
>
> >    If I leave it at default, it looks completely different in the
> >actual render, from how it looked in Quickrender.  You know, that weird
> >wave-banding across the object, like a bleached rainbow . . .
>
>   Sounds like a dithering issue.

Yes, I must change my opinion, as I stated I thought this could be from
your lighting. But this is becuase I am using a 24 bit desplay and
dithering was not the first thing that came to mind, but lighting
was..But after seeing the replies about it being dithering, I must agree
if you are not using a 24bit board of some kind to display your
rendering, that dithering would be the most likely problem..

=RRW=




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #127 ***************************************:-)

Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 20:33:42 EST
From: [e-mail]

 I noticed that other people are having a few problems with textures and
particles. I have however got brushmaps to stay on the particles which is
spectacular( but memory intensive). Particles seem unpredictable,
especially with textures and also making imagine obj as the particle - this
works sometimes and not others- but I can say imagine obj as particles chew
up memory - so keeping it simple is the way to get it to work. If people
get nice effects with certain numbers in the particle effects requester, it
would be nice to see them come up onto the list.

It would be nice to see an interactive attributes editor wind up in a
version of Imagine some day - even lowly old infini- d has this, albiet its
as slow as dogs balls. I suppose this is what forge is up to

Bye the way, in our research lab,a not too complex Alias project,takes up
sixty meg of hardrive space, which to my way of thinking, tells me that big
is not always better or more importantly,the most efficient.Its great what
we have here with Imagine.

David Haines
College of Fine Arts
Phone: +61 +2 +339-9555
Fax:   +61 +2 +339-9506





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #128 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Quickrender versus Project
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 09:17:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Edwin Phillips <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 22 Sep 1994, Randy R. Wall wrote:

> >
> >     If I leave it at default, it looks completely different in the
> > actual render, from how it looked in Quickrender.  You know, that weird
> > wave-banding across the object, like a bleached rainbow . . .
>
> Hmmm. Not sure but sounds like its a lighting problem. You could set up a
> light set and use it rather than the defualt light in the quickrender.
> This will of course slow your quickrenders a bit, but probably give you a
> better representation of what you will get in the stage or action editors.
>
> =RRW=
>
>

    You could turn off the light in quickrender... 'bleached rainbow'
seems to indicate that the neon light is being 'washed' by the white light.

    Ed

/****************************************************************************/
/* Ed Phillips  [e-mail]      University of Delaware       */
/* Jr Systems Programmer  [phone]    IT/Network and Systems Services */
/****************************************************************************/


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #129 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Lighting in QuickRender
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 10:43:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rob Freundlich <[e-mail]>

When you do a QuickRender (Imagine 2.0), it asks you where you want the light
to be, in horizontal and vertical degrees.  I've been wondering what the other
values of this quasi-light are.  That is, what are its intensity, distance from
the object/"camera", shape (spherical, conical, etc), diminish value,
shadow-casting, etc?

This question is prompted by the "lighting" response to someone's question
about QR vs Project Render.  When I read it I flashed back to last night when I
was trying to put a light into a scene to reproduce the QR image.

---
Rob Freundlich, Senior Software Engineer | Some folks you don't have
IDX Systems Corporation                  | to satirize, you just quote 'em.
                                         | - Tom Paxton, from "A Folk
Amiga 4000/040.  deal with it.           |        Singer's Guide to Usenet"


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #130 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Particles & Textures
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 16:28:23 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Milan Polle)

David Haines writes:

> I noticed that other people are having a few problems with textures and
>particles. I have however got brushmaps to stay on the particles which is
>spectacular( but memory intensive).

Wow! I wonder how you did this, I didn't succeed.

>Particles seem unpredictable,
>especially with textures and also making imagine obj as the particle - this
>works sometimes and not others-

My biggest problem was that objects used as particles lost their textures,
but Mike Halvorson explained that it wasn't possible, but maybe there would
be a solution in the future.

>It would be nice to see an interactive attributes editor wind up in a
>version of Imagine some day - even lowly old infini- d has this, albiet its
>as slow as dogs balls. I suppose this is what forge is up to

Yeah, well maybe if Forge would support Imagine's textures as well.

>Bye the way, in our research lab,a not too complex Alias project,takes up
>sixty meg of hardrive space, which to my way of thinking, tells me that big
>is not always better or more importantly,the most efficient.Its great what
>we have here with Imagine.

Sure thing, I don't have an indigo at home to play with wavefront, but hey,
an Amiga is a much more fun machine and Imagine is getting better.

Let your Imagination run wild,

Milan


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #131 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Quasi-marble texture
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 10:48:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rob Freundlich <[e-mail]>

I was trying to make a marble texture last night in Imagine 2.0 (no Essence)
and stumbled into something interesting.  I made my object a pale white
(190-ish on all the RGB sliders), high Shiny value, high Hardness, low
Roughness, Specular just a few shades below the object color, ummm, possibly
others as well.

I then applied two wood textures.  The textures are rotated with respect to
each other.  Both have very wide bands (and a low number of bands) and a large
Variation value (for "burl" effect, according to Understanding Imagine).  The
color of each texture is a darker shade of grey than the object, and the two
textures have slightly different colors.

My object is a dome-shape, and the result looks quite a bit like marble.  Doing
the same with a black object and very dark shades gave a dark marble-ish look,
although I'm not entirely happy with it yet.

When I get them finished, I'll post the images and objects to the net.

---
Rob Freundlich, Senior Software Engineer | Some folks you don't have
IDX Systems Corporation                  | to satirize, you just quote 'em.
                                         | - Tom Paxton, from "A Folk
Amiga 4000/040.  deal with it.           |        Singer's Guide to Usenet"


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #132 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Lighting (Logo Sizes in S
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 00:53:00 -0100
From: [e-mail] (Torgeir Holm)

>Actually, I think he meant the Imagine3.0 Manual itself. Yes,
>my manual's photos/images are too dark in some instances. That's
>partly due to the type of paper it's printed on, I think...

My guess is that they failed to correct the pictures for dot gain
before printing. Dot Gain is when the halftone dots grow, because of
paper/ ink combinations. It is not a difficult thing to fix, if you know
about it :)

OIB: Does anyone know of a good way to make realistic, tiny explotions?

Anyone recieved 3.1 yet?


Torge!r


[e-mail]

----
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   The BYTE Castle - 6988 3700 / 6988 4100 - Askim, Norway - Info-board    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #133 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Quickrender versus Projec
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 00:53:00 -0100
From: [e-mail] (Torgeir Holm)

>If I leave it at default, it looks completely different in the
>actual render, from how it looked in Quickrender.  You know, that weird
>wave-banding across the object, like a bleached rainbow . . .

>Thanks folks, for your attention.

Sounds to me like you have dithering turned on in your quickrender, and
off in your final renderings. I make all my Quickrenders in 24 bit, then
use PPshow4.0 to view them in HAM8. (I have made a Global Hotkey in
Dopus which does this, so I won't have to swap screens). I find that my
quickrenders often look a lot different (better) when displayed with
ppshow.


Torge!r


[e-mail]

----
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   The BYTE Castle - 6988 3700 / 6988 4100 - Askim, Norway - Info-board    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #134 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Quickrender versus Project
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 22:00:00 PDT
From: Stethem Ted              5721 <[e-mail]>

  This banding is definitely due to dithering.  This is because Quickrender
is set by default to HAM (in the Amiga) because this is the fastest/bestest
tradeoff for test renders.  You can change the Quickrender default in the
preferences to higher resolutions/colors but it will be at the expense of
time, which kind of defeats the point of Quickrender, but each to his own
... er, preferences.

_\|*****************<<<-ooOoo->>>***********************|/_
  *                                                     *
  *  I have a terabyte appetite on a kilobyte budget!   *
  *                                                     *
 <<  - Kwantum Kid, Inventor of the SCRAM,              >>
  *    Semi-Concious Redundant Access Memory            *
  *                                                     *
_ ******************<<<-xxXxx->>>************************_
 /|                                                     |\


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #135 ***************************************:-)

Subject: 060 Availability
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 12:27:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

Hi All-

This is the promised follow up report on the '060 Warp Engine Board.
I sent mail to the developer, Bill Coldwell and was told that the
pin holes next to the 040 were not for the 060, but for testing and
diagnostics.

He also said that the 060 wouldn't work with the amiga OS as yet.

He suggested that I wait for what he called the "transwarp engine"
which features it's own ROM, allowing it to work with the amiga OS.

When I queried as to availability and pricing schedules i received a
polite "no comment on that yet."

OK-  while the data supports no conclusions as yet,  I'll take an
UNeducated, UNinformed guess.  They are developing it.  They
really want to tell us about it.  For matters of security in
r&d, they can't.

I for one will follow Mr. Coldwells advice.  I'm going to wait.

Nic-  from what i know, the only thing you need to change the 28mhz
WE to the 40mhz is the new chip.

OK- Imagine time- Has anyone ever been able to get the Global Lens
Flare texture to work?

Trapped in a world without lenses...
Bob


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #136 ***************************************:-)

Subject:  re:Lighting in QuickRender
Date:  Thu, 22 Sep 1994 13:15:00 -0400
From: "rob (r.d.) hounsell" <[e-mail]>

In message "Lighting in QuickRender", '[e-mail]' writes:

>When you do a QuickRender (Imagine 2.0), it asks you where you want the light
>to be, in horizontal and vertical degrees.  I've been wondering what the other
>values of this quasi-light are.  That is, what are its intensity, distance from

>the object/"camera", shape (spherical, conical, etc), diminish value,
>shadow-casting, etc?

  I'm not sure about shape, etc., but the intensity for the quickrender light
can be set in preferences.

Rob
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Rob Hounsell                           Internet: [e-mail]            |
| Team Leader: UNIX                      PHONE: [phone]                |
| DMS System Performance Development     ESN: 395-2904                        |
| Dept. 7D23                             Bell Northern Research               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #137 ***************************************:-)

Subject: PCV2.0
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 14:38:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Edwin Phillips <[e-mail]>

    Does anyone know if Imagine PC V2.0 will support 24 or 16bit
color modes?  All this talk about dithering has me thinking that I don't
have Imagine using one of the modes.  I never even thought to look at a
render with an external viewer... probably looks lots better in 24 color ;-)

    Ed

/****************************************************************************/
/* Ed Phillips  [e-mail]      University of Delaware       */
/* Jr Systems Programmer  [phone]    IT/Network and Systems Services */
/****************************************************************************/



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #138 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: PCV2.0
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 16:44:40 -0500 (CDT)
From: Cliff Lee <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 22 Sep 1994, Edwin Phillips wrote:

>     Does anyone know if Imagine PC V2.0 will support 24 or 16bit
> color modes?  All this talk about dithering has me thinking that I don't
> have Imagine using one of the modes.  I never even thought to look at a
> render with an external viewer... probably looks lots better in 24 color ;-)

As I recall, it did.  I know that 3.0 does.  And your right, looking at
the output from VPIC, or DISPLAY, or GDS, or CSHOW...  lets you see it in
24 bits.



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #139 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: PCV2.0
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 17:47:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Olivares - PHAM/F94 <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 22 Sep 1994, Edwin Phillips wrote:

>
>     Does anyone know if Imagine PC V2.0 will support 24 or 16bit
> color modes?  All this talk about dithering has me thinking that I don't
> have Imagine using one of the modes.  I never even thought to look at a
> render with an external viewer... probably looks lots better in 24 color ;-)

   Imagine PC v2.0 does support 24 and 16 bit modes, you change these
under modify in the project editor.

Mindflux.



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #140 ***************************************:-)

Subject: quickrender light distance.
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 13:21:45 EST
From: [e-mail]

Yo Folks.
  With all the talk of the various aspects of quickrender light sources,
one niggling question which has bugged me for years, since the beginning of
2.0 anyway,is - How far out from 0,0,0 is imagines quickrender light ?

 I understand the other aspects of quickrender lights- I thinks its been
said, that the place to look is in the preferances editor for its
intensity, colour etc but it would be great to know how far out from the
centre the light sits, because sometimes those quickrenders get gorgeous
lighting and it would be nice to emulate position etc in the stage.

Of course, as has been said, the other way around this is to make your own
and then use this same default lighting set up in the stage.

While were on the lighting thing, I noticed some one saying that they made
the spherical light really large.Does this have an effect, ie the size
relationship to spherical objects, since I always thought they where the
same intensity in any direction and so I never bother to work the size of
spherical lights, only position - I only ask this, since in a program like
this, it is sometimes easy to miss something as obvious etc.

Ide love to see more lighting textures in a later version of imagine,that
window texture is really beautifull.

Depth of field is really easy in the quickrender requesters of stage and
detail,and yields nice results- anyone figured out how to make the action
editor depth of field work as painlessly as the quickrender functions.I am
always confused by the options, partly because its a dual requester for
stereo 3d etc, also there seems to be several differant ways to implement
the depth of field functions. The doc is confusing,I am not a great
mathematician.Sometimes I go the brute force random mode road, but lets
face it, depth of field does slow things up, so this isnt the best
aproach.. Help !

David Haines
College of Fine Arts
Phone: +61 +2 +339-9555
Fax:   +61 +2 +339-9506





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #141 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re:  Lighting in QuickRender
Date:     Fri, 23 Sep 1994 00:50:27 -0400
From: Jason B Koszarsky <[e-mail]>

>When you do a QuickRender (Imagine 2.0)

Light colour & intensity is set in the preferences editor of Imagine.
You do have the option to add your own light source to scene and turn
off the quickrender lightsource.  This way you have complete control.

Jaeson K.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #142 ***************************************:-)

Subject: QRender versus Project, by the way . . .
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 22:10:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>


Hey y'all,

    Case I didn't say this in a straightforward enough manner:  I
really LIKE the way the quickrender image looks, as opposed to the way it
comes out in the Project Render.  I want my final image to look that way,
too.  That's why I brought this up.

    And again, apologies for density.  Osmium's got nothing on me . . .


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #143 ***************************************:-)

Subject: QR versus ProjectRender, thanks
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 22:03:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Stirred up one with this query, and I'm certainly grateful for all the
attention it has gotten.

    Dithering and lighting are the two points which come closest to
making sense.  But I'm still a little puzzled.

    Doesn't the Project Renderer work with dithering invoked by
default?  I certainly never touch that auto-dithering button.

    Forgive my density here, but I'm afraid I still haven't
comprehended why a quickrender of my scene comes out looking so drastically
different from my final render of that same scene.

    I don't have a 24bit board yet, so we're talking about Imagine's
own internal viewers.

    I do my quickrender, Ham laced, in stage, and it displays
automatically.  My object has a nice grainy texture.  I render the very
scene in the Project editor, 24bit ILBM, Ham.  I click on Show. I'm shown
the same scene, but my object has lost its nice grainy texture and has
that wave phenomenon all over the surfaces. I've even tried making both
QR and ProjectRender ILBM or RGBN, it doesn't matter: the difference
between the two images is still pronounced.

    Several of you mentioned 24bit display boards.  Since I don't
have one, does that mean my ordinary 1084S monitor is displaying a 24bit
quickrender and a non-24bit Project Render?

    (Thanks again, folks, for spending so much time on this).




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #144 ***************************************:-)

Subject: 3.1 ships!
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 05:36:00 -0500
From: gregory denby <[e-mail]>

Hi all,
Got the upgrade yesterday.  It has:
1. "about" info lists version number explicitlly
2. All aspects of States except brushes now morphable(i.e. no built in
  2D morphing)
3.  Better DFX handling
4.  BackDrop Images: loads PIC/ANIM/FLC frames as 1bit images to aid
    in placing objects while in the editors
5.  Tackable ANIM/FLC brushes and ANIM/FLC as Global brushes
6.  Preview PIC/ANIM/FLC from within Imagine
7.  Field Rendering for the video perfectionist
8.  Can now change object attributes while in Stage
9.  Views from lights and objects, as well as from camera (good for placing
    shadows
10. Smart Bones, as reported earlier, assignment of faces to bones now much
    easier.
11. Starfield bug fixed
12. Jerky looping anim bug now fixed
13.  Five new textures.  I've tried fire and clouds, and they're waaayyyy
    cool, but boy do they eat up the clock cycles.
14. Nine new FX, mostly global it appears, and including a better Lens
    Flare.

The docs are clear, but not compendious, but most of the improvements need
no further explanation.  Obviously a .1 upgrade, but a bit more edge on
the tool.  So I'm off to experiment.

Greg Denby
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #145 ***************************************:-)

Subject:       Re: QR versus ProjectRender, thanks
Date:          Fri, 23 Sep 1994 11:15:37 GMT0BST
From: [e-mail] (Jamie Knight)

>     Forgive my density here, but I'm afraid I still haven't
> comprehended why a quickrender of my scene comes out looking so drastically
> different from my final render of that same scene.

Doesn't Quickrender use scanline rendering, as opposed to Trace?
QR also omits some types of reflection, I think, so it will look
different to a Project render, which uses whatever you specify (Trace
or Scaline in the Project Modify requester) but includes all
reflections and things.

>     I do my quickrender, Ham laced, in stage, and it displays
> automatically.  My object has a nice grainy texture.  I render the very
> scene in the Project editor, 24bit ILBM, Ham.  I click on Show. I'm shown
> the same scene, but my object has lost its nice grainy texture and has
> that wave phenomenon all over the surfaces. I've even tried making both
> QR and ProjectRender ILBM or RGBN, it doesn't matter: the difference
> between the two images is still pronounced.

That appears to be why QuickRender is faster than ProjectRender - it
does less work.

>     Several of you mentioned 24bit display boards.  Since I don't
> have one, does that mean my ordinary 1084S monitor is displaying a 24bit
> quickrender and a non-24bit Project Render?

If QuickRender is set to HAM then the QR you see will be a dithered
HAM image.  As far as I can tell, Imagine always creates a 24-bit
QuickRender, then dithers and hacks it around to display a HAM image.
Try viewing the quickrender file in ViewTek or Rend24.

>     (Thanks again, folks, for spending so much time on this).

That's OK, I probably don't know what I'm talking about anyway :)


----------------------------------------+---------------------------
Jamie Knight                            | [e-mail]
Environmental Services Computer Support |
Hereford & Worcester County Council     | Place mildly amusing quote,
Worcester, UK                           |   phrase or opinion here..
All views are my own, etc, etc          |


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #146 ***************************************:-)

Subject: QR versus ProjectRender, thanks
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 14:26:43 CET
From: cjo <[e-mail]>

Mike McCool wrote;

>I do my quickrender, Ham laced, in stage, and it displays
>automatically.  My object has a nice grainy texture.  I render the very
>scene in the Project editor, 24bit ILBM, Ham.  I click on Show. I'm shown
>the same scene, but my object has lost its nice grainy texture and has
>that wave phenomenon all over the surfaces.

Well, basically, this has already been answered but I'll try to explain it
my own way (the beginner way, cause that's what I am).

When you make a quickrender you make a dithered HAM image (dithering is a
way to make soft shading from one nuance of a color to the next). This way
you will get a soft ("unbanded") picture, even if you don't have a lot of
"possible" colors (i e many bitplanes). HAM only has a possible 4096 colors.

When you make a picture from "project" you make it 24-bit, and this is where
your problem begins. 24-bit pics are great, they contain all the color
information you could possibly wish for, but when viewing them from the
project-editor you still have (only) a "standard" amiga-screen to view them
on, wich means that the viewer will "strip" all the bits that it can't view.
The viewer will not "autodither" the output, meaning that when you try to
view a picture with "to many" colors in it, you will not get soft shadings.
"Autodither" in the modify-requester in "project" means that when you render
a picture with less than 16 000 000 colors (24-bits) the renderer will
dither the "step" from one color of an object to the next, making the step
smooth.

Since a have never tried switching off the "autodither" I'm not quite sure
wich way it works, but try the following for an example;

  1. Set up a scene with objects that hasn't got any dithering (set the
     dither-attribute to 0 (zero) of all objects.
  2. Switch off the "autodither".
  3. Render a HAM-image from "project".
  4. Save the result somewhere.
  5. Modify all the objects in the scene to have full dithering (255).
  6. Switch on the "autodither" again.
  7. Render a new HAM-image.
  8. Save this one as well.
  9. View the pictures and compare them.

The above is probably "double" work. You shouldn't have to switch off the
dithering in "attributes" and "projects" both, but since I'm not sure wich
way it works - and since I don't have my Amiga beside me to try it - I have
played this the safe way.

If this ain't right ... well, don't blame me. I said I'm a beginner :)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
|   Conny Joensson   |   Swedish Space Corp. Esrange            |
|   Kiruna           |   Satellite operations - Telecom Div.    |
|   Sweden           |   [e-mail]              |
-----------------------------------------------------------------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #147 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: 3.1 ships!
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 14:26:10 +0100
From: MICHAEL RICHARDS <[e-mail]>

In message <[e-mail]>,
    gregory denby <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> Hi all,
> Got the upgrade yesterday.  It has:

[lots of cools stuff deleted]

    Is this an automatic upgrade to all registered users - or is
this part of the Imagine $100 upgrade offer ?

    If its the latter, does anyone have some info on how to get
hold of this offer ? I wrote to Impulse but I've heard nothing so far.

    Thanks in advance.
                    Mike.

You can reach Mike Richards at the following   /@\            \|/
address ... (if you're that desperate).       `-\ \  ______  - 0 -
                                                 \ \/ ` /  \  /|\ _
            [e-mail]                        \_i / \  |\____//
                                                    | |==| |=----/
---- Why not drop me a line ...? -------------------hn/--hn/-----------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #148 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Yes, I know you can set your own lights in Detail ...
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 9:32:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rob Freundlich <[e-mail]>

To all the people who responded to my post by saying "you can adjust the
intensity and color of the QR Light in prefs, but hey, you can add your own
light source and not use it at all": Thanks, but you misunderstand my question.

I had an image come out *really* nice in QR with the default lightsource.  I
want to be able to stick lights into the Project to reproduce this.  To do so,
I need four things:

1. Color of light.  Get it from Prefs
2. Intensity.  Get it from prefs
3. Angle from camera.  Look at the QR Lightsource box when it pops up.
4. Distance of light from the center of the view and/or world.

Number 4 is what I can't figure out.  I think I'm about the third person in the
last couple of days to ask this, and we're all getting "put your own light in"
style answers.  THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry if this is a bit curt, it's been a h*ll of a day, and it's only 9:35 AM.

---
Rob Freundlich, Senior Software Engineer | Some folks you don't have
IDX Systems Corporation                  | to satirize, you just quote 'em.
                                         | - Tom Paxton, from "A Folk
Amiga 4000/040.  deal with it.           |        Singer's Guide to Usenet"


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #149 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: 3.1 ships!
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 06:58:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kelly Petlig <[e-mail]>

On Fri, 23 Sep 1994, MICHAEL RICHARDS wrote:
>     If its the latter, does anyone have some info on how to get
> hold of this offer ? I wrote to Impulse but I've heard nothing so far.

Like Michael, I too opted to wait until I saw some physical software
before I outlay my $100.  Someone please (Mike H.?) re-broadcast the
Imagine upgrade deal, before many more of us buy Lightwave.

And is the manual updated?

 Image Runner, sysop of Amiga Images   // / BOOM, sooner or later, boom.\
Mr.Kelly Petlig<[e-mail]> \X/  \ finger address for BBS info /



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #150 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Quasi-marble texture
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 08:21:29 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Brad Molsen)

>I was trying to make a marble texture last night in Imagine 2.0 (no Essence)
>and stumbled into something interesting.  I made my object a pale white
>(190-ish on all the RGB sliders), high Shiny value, high Hardness, low
>Roughness, Specular just a few shades below the object color, ummm, possibly
>others as well.
>
>I then applied two wood textures.  The textures are rotated with respect to
>each other.  Both have very wide bands (and a low number of bands) and a large
>Variation value (for "burl" effect, according to Understanding Imagine).  The
>color of each texture is a darker shade of grey than the object, and the two
>textures have slightly different colors.
>
>My object is a dome-shape, and the result looks quite a bit like marble.  Doing

>the same with a black object and very dark shades gave a dark marble-ish look,
>although I'm not entirely happy with it yet.
>
>When I get them finished, I'll post the images and objects to the net.
>
        Rob, If you get an effect that you think looks the most
marble-like, could you post the attribute settings to the list also?
                                Thanks in advance,
                                        Brad

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Almond rocca?!! Ahhh..no thanks, I have a cat!

Brad Molsen c/o  LORAL                          [e-mail]

13810 SE Eastgate Way Suite 500                 [phone]
Bellevue, Wa 98005                              Fax: [phone]




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #151 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Yes, I know you can set your own lights in Detail ...
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 12:43:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Right on, Rob!

    That's what I'd like to be able to do:  take a Stage-Editor-style
peek at the configurations of camera and lighting for quickrender in the
Detail Editor.

    But like Bette said in NOW VOYAGER, why ask for the moon, when
we've got the stars?


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #152 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Yes, I know you can set your own lights in Detail ...
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 00:05:19 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Jon Bagge <[e-mail]>

On Fri, 23 Sep 1994, Rob Freundlich wrote:

> Number 4 is what I can't figure out.  I think I'm about the third person in th
e
> last couple of days to ask this, and we're all getting "put your own light in"

> style answers.  THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO!!!!!!!!!!

I always though QR put the light where the camera is by default.
This would mean the distance is the same as the distance from the camera
to the object.

Only my .10 NOK worth.

:-Jon



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #153 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Using Fircracker24 w/IM3.0...
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 19:50:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

    Okay, I went to a local dealer today to check things out. They
used to be Amiga, but have since gone PC/Mac. Consequently, their
support for the Amiga has dropped to nothing. They do, however, have a
whole bunch of cards and peripherals lying around. I scrounged and
managed to discover a Firecracker 24 board lying among a pile of PC
cards. Turns out the card was a demo out of a 2000. It has no software
or docs. It's just the card. I asked one of the salespeople how much
it was. He has no clue. He goes to another guy and "consults". The
other guy swings around and says $30. I say, "I'll take it!!" I later
discover there are no Amiga knowledgable people at this location
anymore (they all quit). The salepeople that helped me obviously had
no clue what I was attempting to purchase. You should have seen the
look on the salesperson's face when, after quoting $30, he looked up
the card in their database. He turns to me and says, "$30, so you'll
be getting the board for $960 off." I could hardly contain my biiig
smile...

    So, now I have this board. What do I do with it? I know
Imagine can render directly to the Firecracker but have had no success
so far. I've gone into Preferences and flipped the USFC flag to
T. I've clicked the 'Use Firecracker' button in Project to on. So far
nothing. I've got a Rev 2.1 board (that's what it says on the
side). Should I be using specific presets? The manully says the the
FC24 can be used with Quickrenders. How?
    Viewtek for Firecracker has confirmed that the FC24 board I
have does indeed work. I have been able to display images via the
FC24. I just haven't been able to use it with what I bought it for,
Imagine... Anyone?

    On an aside, how good is Light24, or rather should I even
bother getting the FC24 software? If it is worth getting how should I
go about that?

    The FC24 has two ports, one 23 pin (RGB Video out), and one 15
pin port. Is the 15 pin port for a cable from the 24 pin Amiga out
(something about a WB overlay thing)?

                            J.---->
E-Mail: [e-mail]




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #154 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: QR versus ProjectRender, thanks
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 18:17:40 -0600 (MDT)
From: Roger Straub <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 22 Sep 1994, Mike McCool wrote:

>     I do my quickrender, Ham laced, in stage, and it displays
> automatically.  My object has a nice grainy texture.  I render the very
> scene in the Project editor, 24bit ILBM, Ham.  I click on Show. I'm shown
> the same scene, but my object has lost its nice grainy texture and has
> that wave phenomenon all over the surfaces. I've even tried making both
> QR and ProjectRender ILBM or RGBN, it doesn't matter: the difference
> between the two images is still pronounced.

Do you have the Auto Dither switch on? If you do, Imagine will not dither
an image generated in 24 bit. Hope this helps...

See ya,
    Roger


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #155 ***************************************:-)

Subject: RE: Imagine bug :(
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 13:38:32 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Rivers)

>- Lockstated particles objects loose their textures

Pick the Object, Fracture it with Scale Factor set to 1.0(Don't merge the
object,because each face must NOT share any point/edge with another face)
create a state with Shape checked, apply textures/brushmaps and specify the
Lockstate. Create project using the particles. render.(may work for
explode,fireworks etc.)
-------------------------------------------------------
|  Commodore failure. Press mouse button to continue  |
|  Guru Meditation  $83500000     task : $00000CBM    |
-------------------------------------------------------
            A4000/060 wow! this is fast.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #156 ***************************************:-)



    id m0qoL8w-0006MLC; Fri, 23 Sep 94 20:39 EDT
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 20:39:10 +0100
From: Mark Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Quickrender versus Project
To: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

If you check the prefs menu item, you'll find preference settings for
quickrender, which comes with Imagine set at the defaults of ham
quarterscreen, scanline, etc. If you change these settings to accepted
defaults, such as hires ham8 on AGA Amigas, you will get the same results
as the Project rendering gives, which also means it will take longer. You
can also change the default background color, which was blue in 2.0, and
is now black in 3.0.




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #157 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Lighting in QuickRender
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 20:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> When you do a QuickRender (Imagine 2.0), it asks you where you want the light
> to be, in horizontal and vertical degrees.  I've been wondering what the other

> values of this quasi-light are.  That is, what are its intensity, distance fro
m
> the object/"camera", shape (spherical, conical, etc), diminish value,
> shadow-casting, etc?

Well, the quickrender light is pretty basic, you can set up the intensity
in the prefs editor, and if you want shadows you can set the prefs so
that it will render in raytrace so you can have shadows. As for its
location, I believe it defualts to the same as the camera, so when moving
it horizontal and vertical you are moving it away from the camera in
these degrees.
>
> This question is prompted by the "lighting" response to someone's question
> about QR vs Project Render.  When I read it I flashed back to last night when
I
> was trying to put a light into a scene to reproduce the QR image.

Well, as I said I believe its  in the same location as the camera, so to
duplicate it in the stage or action editors you would need to place it at
the same location and then move it X or Z, but not Y. If you plan on
moving the camera I think you would have to Associate the light to the
camera.. Hope this works, I think it will but have not tried it myself.

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #158 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: 060 Availability
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 20:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

Thanks for the info on the warp been thinking about it a lot, and I geuss
I will waite too.

> OK- Imagine time- Has anyone ever been able to get the Global Lens
> Flare texture to work?

Well this sounds like a problem someone else helped me with when I had a
problem with it..did you copy the fixed versions from disk 1, it won't
work unless you do..hehhe tahts all for now as theres not much sense in
me trying to help if you don't have the correct version..

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #159 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: PCV2.0
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 20:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>
>     Does anyone know if Imagine PC V2.0 will support 24 or 16bit
> have Imagine using one of the modes.  I never even thought to look at a
> render with an external viewer... probably looks lots better in 24 color ;-)

I don't know about the PC version much, but am sure you can..I can also
tell you that yes it looks thousands of times better...hehehe

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #160 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: 3.1 ships!
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 21:15:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>
> Hi all,
> Got the upgrade yesterday.  It has:

Yep got mine today..going to play with it as soon as I'm off the
phone..hehehe..Looks like its got everything they promised..and some
extras too..Was hoping to see shadow mapping, but then they didn't
promise that for this update..that was for the last update 3.0..sure hope
they don't forget about it..as I think it would truely make Imagine a lot
nicer if it had it.

=RRW=



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #161 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: QR versus ProjectRender, thanks
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 20:54:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>     Doesn't the Project Renderer work with dithering invoked by
> default?  I certainly never touch that auto-dithering button.

well it will if you set it to in prefs, I don't remeber if it is set this
way already, but I think its time to click the button and see how it
works..

>     I don't have a 24bit board yet, so we're talking about Imagine's
> own internal viewers.

Well, then dithering is the problem. If it still looks bad then its
becuase you didn't save a quickrender with all the objects that are in
the project and Specify it as your pallete so that you can get the best
results out of the project renderings.

>     Several of you mentioned 24bit display boards.  Since I don't
> have one, does that mean my ordinary 1084S monitor is displaying a 24bit
> quickrender and a non-24bit Project Render?

Well, if you set the project to render in ILBM-24 then you will desplay a
16 color highRes picture if you are on anything other than a 1200 or 4000,
but you could load it into a paint program or image proccesing program as
ADPro to see how it looks in ham. Otherwise just set it to ILBM-12 and
Ham and possibly Lace to be able to view it in the project editor. If
your quickrender is set to ILBM-24 you could get a Ham version desplay
depending on how the view mode is set in prefs. You can simulate any of
these in the projects simply by selecting it from the preset list.

=RRW=




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #162 ***************************************:-)

Subject: GENLOCK
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 16:59:32 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>

Subject: Genlock's

I have a few questions about Imagine 3.0's genlocking capabilities, they
seem to have disappeared!

1) What happened to the "use genlock" button on the brush requestor? If I
   nothing happens, the object is still rendered

2) What happened to the "genlock" attribute button, it seems to have
   gone... With this feature in 2.0 , you could assign any attributes to
   an object, click "genlock" and it would be rendered in colour 0, BUT
   the objects true attributes would still reflect in other objects,
   Very cool :) With this feature gone I feel Imagine 3.0 has lost a lot
   of usefullness.

3) When using the coverdisk version of Imagine 2.0 , my machine crashes as
   soon as it 'hits' an object with the "use genlock" set. Has anyone else
   had any luck with this?

4) The same version won't accept any brushes with over 32 colours! !t just
   says "error loading..." but the same brushes will work in im3.0
   I am using an A1200 with A1230+ 40/40/8 acclerator, the genlock is a
   GVP G-lock.

5) Why do im3.0 background colour zero colours not genlock? Imagine seems
   to black,0,0,0 ( colour zero) in the 2nd position of the palette, so
   It will not genlock. I have set the genc colours and background colours
   to 0,0,0


I have called Impulse about this but he didnt know what  was talking about.
Does anyone else out there use G-Lock, I would like to hear from you, esp.
about the AA/ECS features which I still havent gotten to grips with.

Cheers,

Robbie . c/o Mike.





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #163 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Using Fircracker24 w/IM3.0...
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 01:42:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Blaquiere <[e-mail]>

I have a Firecracker24, and praise the Lord every time I use Imagine. (No
small feat for an atheist) If you tell Imagine to use the FC24, it will
automatically display whatever it is rendering, with the Amiga display
overlaid on top of the 24-bit image! This means you don't have to wait
for quickrenders to finish before noticing something's wrong, and with
full 24-bit display, you'll get a much better look at what's wrong, too.

I can't recall whether the board needed anything special to work with
Imagine; I installed the software that came with it, and that was 2-3
years ago. I did check, however, and in my libs: directory is
fc24.library; that sounds like something Imagine would need to talk to
the FC24. I suggest phoning Impulse and asking them about it.

There may be better boards, with better software, but for Imagine
diehards, nothing beats a FC24. (Oops, I just remembered -- Opalvision
works with Imagine, too)



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #164 ***************************************:-)

Subject: thanks for QR versus Project help
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 23:11:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Hey y'all,

    Well, thanks to everyone's generous input, I figured out what the
difference was, between my QR'd image and the one I rendered in Project.

    It's that the Quickrender is 12bit, and I was rendering
everything in Project in 24bit, which my standard amiga display converts
to a weirdly dithered ham.

    The specific project I was working on, the object in question
actually came out looking better on my machine in 12bit.  It's supposed
to be this sort of bunker, converted into a saloon on the moon, and I
wanted it to have that soft concrete grainy look it has in quickrender.

    Thanks everyone, for making me think this one through.  It's also
made me wonder if it's not about time to go 24bit board and
multi-sync. Output to video is my main priority . . . anybody got any
suggestions?  I would imagine J Goldman got the last amazing deal on a
24bit board, at least on this side of the galaxy.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #165 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: 3.1 BUG!
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 00:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>
> Yep got mine today..going to play with it as soon as I'm off the
> phone.

> =RRW=

Well I messed around in 3.1 and right off the bat I wanted to see how the
new bones commands worked. Well I hate to report bugs, but heres one I
think everyone who gets 3.1 will find out after trying the new bones
commands. The new bones feature works quite nice, and does make it a bit
easier but there is a problem that could get some folks confused, as I
know there are already plenty of people who are already confused..

Anyways, here is the bug as well as an easy way to get around it until
Impulse fixes it..Basically you can now make your subgroups in Pick
Faces mode and then select either MK. Sm.Bone Subgroup or MK. BigBone Subgroup
and just select the axis you want them to be applied to. This does save a
few steps in the process. But what is wrong with it is if you select MK. Big
Bone Subgroup it names the subgroup AXIS.SB, if you select
MK. Sm.Bone Subgroup it names the subgroup AXIS.BB. In other words it sets
them incorrectly, MK. Big Bone Subgroup. makes small bone subgroups and
MK. Sm. Bone Subgroup makes Big bone subgroups. I geuss the guy who wrote
the 3.0 bones tutorial must of had something to do with this..just joking..

The way I have gotten around this so I don't get cunfused is I have set up
two new gadgets for each command and just named them correctly on my
gadgets, this elemenates any problems. But if you plan on using the
Functions menu in the Make sub-menu to use these commands you will have
to remember that they work opposite of what they are labeled as...Anyways
hope this help save some of you the trouble of figuring this out on your
own...Though I'm sure you will want to check it out for yourselves..

later...

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #166 ***************************************:-)

Subject: New Lens Flare
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 06:02:02 -0500
From: gregory denby <[e-mail]>

Jason Koszarsky asked me:

>...does it still cause a flare even if the light is hidden behind an
> object?

to quote the docs:
"This version of Lens Flare operates exactly the same as the older version
(GlblFlar.ifx) except that this flare IS blocked by objects and is
sensitive to transparent objects..."

Haven't had the time to try it myself, having chewed up lots of time
playing with the new fire texture.  Congratulations Scott K.! This is
one of the most complex shape variation I've seen.  Really looks
like a blow torch.

And Randy Wall, thanks for the tip about the bones screw-up.  Somebody
must be going "Oh, duh?"

Greg Denby
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #167 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Firecracker24
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 94 21:10:00 UTC
From: [e-mail]

FC24s do indeed work in 3000s and 4000s too. In my 3000, though, I did have
to bend the back plate in order for the board to fit. The board is 15.5mhz
output, in other words, it'll work on a 1084 just fine, but not on a high
scan rate monitor. The two ports work with a special cable that'll allow
you overlay your workbench over the FC24's output, but this only works on
a slow scan monitor. I reccomend a two monitor setup, like I have with my
3000. That way, I use my 1950 for a work screen, and a 1084 for 24bit out-
put. Also, this configuration works very well with Vista Pro, Image F/X,
and ADPro. I agree with the other poster, that if you are serious about
Imagine on an Amiga, a FC24 is indispensible. Traces render to it pixel by
pixel, and scanlines go scanline by scanline. It supports all the standard
Amiga display modes, except hi res non-interlaced. With a two monitor display
and a screen grabber, I also use it for a second perspective view, helpful
in those difficult editing situations. In addition to the .lib mentioned by
the other poster, there are some other c directory things included on the
FC24 disk that you'll need, so I would call Impulse and see about getting the
disk. The paint program is sorta out of date, but it does have the neatest
blending tool I've ever seen, and since it's a zorro board, it'll scroll
super bitmaps very nicely. Once you get all the needed software, there are
some changes in Imagine's preferences you'll have to make in order to get
the board to work with Quickrenders, and stuff. Make sure that QUIK is set
to Firecracker 384 (as is mine) or some other legal name found in the rend-
ering presets. QUFF should be set to RGB8. USFC should be set to True. And
OPAL should be set to false. Also, if the Use Firecracker button on the
project editor screen is not on, you'll get no visible quickrender in the
other editors. Good Luck (and what a good deal!)......Bill Graham


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #168 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: IM3.1 and Field Rendering
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 94 15:32:00 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Dan Santos)

In a message of 25 Sep 94 Steve J. Lombardi wrote to me:


 SJL> FIrst Off if anyone else out there is using a Sanyo GVR, you will need
 SJL> to use the 'Reverse Fields' checkbox in subproject requestor. THe
 SJL> results are super smooth animation at the cost of double the render
 SJL> time.

 SJL> Now a question. I hope this doesn't start another 6 week thread about
 SJL> field rendering :-)

 SJL> Can someone in 200 words or less explain why field rendering has to
 SJL> take twice as long?? It seems that instead of rendering a full
 SJL> resolution odd frame and a full resolution even frame and then
 SJL> combining every other scan line from the 2 images that imagine could
 SJL> calculate every other line from odd/even and combine them.

 SJL> Although the results are super smooth, for most of my work doubling
 SJL> the render time is out of the question. Will someone clear this up for
 SJL> me. thanks.

This isn't suppose to happen... I don't have 3.1, but field-rendering shouldn't
take twice as long. I'm using 3.0, and I always double the amount of frames in
any final render in order to create field-rendering using ADPro. THIS takes
double the rendering time since I still have to render full frames (752*576).
Field rendering is archieved by rendering twice the amount of frames, but only
at half resolution (in my case 752*288), so the rendering time remains almost
the same. If Imagine is taking twice the rendering time, it's probably still
rendering full frames, but discarding one of the fields when the frame is
rendered. I hope you're wrong...

 SJL> saint lombo

Dan Santos ([e-mail])
 DigiLight Studios - 3D Animation & Image effects - [phone]
 +-------------------------------+---------------------------+-----------------
----------+
 |A3000-040/A4000-040/PicassoII  |SGI Indigo Elan, ALIAS PA 5|Abekas
A65/DPS-PAR (Amiga)  |
 |Real 3D 2.x/Imagine 3.x/Essence|Liberty, Elastic Reality   |Sony
D2/1"C/BetaSP VTRs     |
 +-------------------------------+---------------------------+-----------------
----------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #169 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: New Lens Flare
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 94 16:28:00 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Dan Santos)

In a message of 24 Sep 94 gregory denby wrote to me:

 gd> Haven't had the time to try it myself, having chewed up lots of time
 gd> playing with the new fire texture.  Congratulations Scott K.! This is
 gd> one of the most complex shape variation I've seen.  Really looks like a
 gd> blow torch.

What? Fire? Fire! FIRE!!! Hehe-hee-eh. Is there a fire texture with 3.1? Is it
better than the fire Steve Worley made with the three Essence textures (he
showed how in the APEX Newsletter a while ago).


Dan Santos ([e-mail])
 DigiLight Studios - 3D Animation & Image effects - [phone]
 +-------------------------------+---------------------------+-----------------
----------+
 |A3000-040/A4000-040/PicassoII  |SGI Indigo Elan, ALIAS PA 5|Abekas
A65/DPS-PAR (Amiga)  |
 |Real 3D 2.x/Imagine 3.x/Essence|Liberty, Elastic Reality   |Sony
D2/1"C/BetaSP VTRs     |
 +-------------------------------+---------------------------+-----------------
----------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #170 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: 060 Availability
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 94 16:21:00 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Dan Santos)

In a message of 22 Sep 94 BOCONNELL wrote to me:

 B> OK- Imagine time- Has anyone ever been able to get the Global Lens Flare
 B> texture to work?

Sure, works great. There was a faulty texture, but there's a replacement that
works fine. I only miss a starfilter to go with it, but maybe this would make
Imagine pictures look Lightwave-made, God forbid :).

Dan Santos ([e-mail])
 DigiLight Studios - 3D Animation & Image effects - [phone]
 +-------------------------------+---------------------------+-----------------
----------+
 |A3000-040/A4000-040/PicassoII  |SGI Indigo Elan, ALIAS PA 5|Abekas
A65/DPS-PAR (Amiga)  |
 |Real 3D 2.x/Imagine 3.x/Essence|Liberty, Elastic Reality   |Sony
D2/1"C/BetaSP VTRs     |
 +-------------------------------+---------------------------+-----------------
----------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #171 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: help! rotating objects
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 19:23:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>  I'm new to imagine and am having trouble rotating objects. This may
>  have
>  somthing to do with the fact that I have the version from a cover
>  disk, but I'm not sure.

Well, if you want to rotate the object in the stage, its quite easy..say
you have a 10 frame animation and at frame one the object has no
rotations on it..to rotate it in in ten frame press RightAmiga_C for and
type 10. This is the goto requester in the stage..anyways this will put
you at frame 10. Now select the object with the mouse and press the "r"
key, now depending on which way you want to rotate it press x,y, or z,
and move the mouse while holding the left button. Once you have it at the
rotation you like just hit the spacebar..now in order for these setting
to be recorded to your staging file you need to go to the Object menu and
select Alignment Bar and the press RightAmiga_S to save it to the file.
Now when you render this the object will rotate threwout the ten frames
to the alignment you set in frame ten. Hope this gets helps?

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #172 ***************************************:-)

Subject: IM3.1 and Field Rendering
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 94 23:14:57 EDT
From: "Steve J. Lombardi" <[e-mail]>

FIrst Off if anyone else out there is using a Sanyo GVR, you will
need to use the 'Reverse Fields' checkbox in subproject requestor.
THe results are super smooth animation at the cost of double
the render time.

Now a question. I hope this doesn't start another 6 week thread about field
rendering :-)

Can someone in 200 words or less explain why field rendering has to take twice
as long?? It seems that instead of rendering a full resolution odd frame
and a full resolution even frame and then combining every other
scan line from the 2 images that imagine could calculate every other
line from odd/even and combine them.

Although the results are super smooth, for most of my work doubling the render
time is out of the question. Will someone clear this up for me. thanks.

saint lombo



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #173 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: help! rotating objects
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 19:45:53 -0600 (MDT)
From: Roger Straub <[e-mail]>

On Sat, 24 Sep 1994, Darryl Lewis wrote:

>  What I want do do is rotate an object around its x axis, then rotate it
> around its y axis. I need this for a game I'm writting, and wanted to use
> imagine to generate the images used. I have the objects already.
> I need to have the object viewed in all directions so it appears that the
> space ship is actuall in space and can be viewed from all directions as the
> user 'flyies around it'.

If you're going for a preset animation sequence, I recomend using the
Rotate effects in the Action editor. Load up Imagine, select 'new' from
the Project menu, name it anything you want, and then press enter. Select
'Action' from the Project menu, set the number of frames, but add one to
this number(I'll explain later), and load in your spaceship object.
Then click on Add, and double click on the ship's F/X channel(any one). A
file requester will pop up. Go to the drawer you keep your effects
in(usually called 'Effects') and pick the Rotate effect(mine is named
Rotate20). Set the ending frame # to about half of the max frame #.
Click on the 'X Axis' check box, and make sure that the degrees text box
reads 360. Then click on OK, go to the frame directly after the first
rotate effect ends, and double click. Set the ending frame # to the last
frame of the animation(including the +1 at the end), click on the 'Y
Axis' check box, and make sure the degrees text box reads 360. Click on
OK. Add your lightsources, save, and set things up the way you want them
to be in the Stage Editor. Save it, and go to the Project Editor. Select
Range, and change the ending frame number to one less than it defaults
to. This is to work around an Imagine quirk. When you rotate something
360 degrees, Imagine will take the object's starting alignment (just
before the rotation takes place) and sets that to the end of the
rotation. This produces a jerky motion at the end of the animation if it
is a looping one. The object will have the same alignment on the last
frame as it does on the first. To work around this, all we have to do is
not render the last frame, and the animation will be as smooth as a
baby's bottom. Then select Generate. The computer will do all the work,
but if the animation is an EXTREMELY long one, or your machine isn't as
fast as it could be, or the render size is very large, the rendering time
will be EXTREMELY LONG. Some of mine have gone for a week or more.

If you're going for interactivity, like the player can actually move the
mouse and the camera moves around the ship, I couldn't help ya unless I
told you to render a frame for each degree marking in two axes(360 * 360
=129600 frames), but that would be ludicrous, besides the fact that you
would have to distribute the game on a hard drive, and that the update
times would be awful. Maybe someone else could help you there.

See ya,
    Roger


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #174 ***************************************:-)

Subject: subscro i[t   iption request
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 18:19:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

please include me on your subscription list - I have just started using Imagine

2.20 on 16 meg  66mgz Pentium and would like to get  learn and do morew
 with ohrether Imagine users.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #175 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: New Lens Flare
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 18:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> And Randy Wall, thanks for the tip about the bones screw-up.  Somebody
> must be going "Oh, duh?"

Ya I would think so..makes me wonder if they ever beta tested it at all,
as this is a pretty obvious problem. I would think one try of it would
have revieled the problem as it did with me..anyways the fix I mentioned
works fine until they correct it. I imagine most people would want these
set up as gadgets anyways so its really no big deal. And it does make
bones easier.

=RRW=



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #176 ***************************************:-)

Subject: help! rotating objects
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 94 13:43:51 1100
From: [e-mail] (Darryl Lewis)

 Hi,
 I'm new to imagine and am having trouble rotating objects. This may
 have
 somthing to do with the fact that I have the version from a cover
 disk, but I'm not sure.

 What I want do do is rotate an object around its x axis, then rotate it
around its y axis. I need this for a game I'm writting, and wanted to use
imagine to generate the images used. I have the objects already.
I need to have the object viewed in all directions so it appears that the
space ship is actuall in space and can be viewed from all directions as the
user 'flyies around it'.
What I was after is a way (or a scriptfile) so I can leave my machine to do
the images while I'm at work to save time.

If someone can help me, I'll give them equal credit space on the title
screen of the game!! The game is 95 % written, except for the bobs!
I'll even send a copy of the game!

If your interested Let me know!


Please help - I'm stuck
Darryl



-- Via DLG Pro v1.0



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #177 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Quickrender Idea
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 94 13:05:00 PDT
From: [e-mail]

If you like the lighting s much in your quickrender, simply change
the size (using prefs) to be the one you want, and render away.  If
you don't have enough ram you can always quickrender to disc.

Too bad if you are depending upon the lighting for an animation, tho.
\KenR
[e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #178 ***************************************:-)

Subject: GENLOCK
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 94 16:49:00 -0100
From: [e-mail] (Torgeir Holm)

>Subject: Genlock's

>I have a few questions about Imagine 3.0's genlocking capabilities, the
>seem to have disappeared!

>1) What happened to the "use genlock" button on the brush requestor? If
>nothing happens, the object is still rendered

The "use genlock" button makes color 0 of the brush transparent,
enabling non rectangular brushmaps.

>2) What happened to the "genlock" attribute button, it seems to have
>gone... With this feature in 2.0 , you could assign any attributes to
>an object, click "genlock" and it would be rendered in colour 0, BUT
>the objects true attributes would still reflect in other objects,
>Very cool :) With this feature gone I feel Imagine 3.0 has lost a lot
>of usefullness.

No idea :(

>3) When using the coverdisk version of Imagine 2.0 , my machine crashes
>soon as it 'hits' an object with the "use genlock" set. Has anyone else
>had any luck with this?

Same thing happened to me in 2.0. It works in 2.9 and 3.0 though.

>4) The same version won't accept any brushes with over 32 colours! !t j
>says "error loading..." but the same brushes will work in im3.0

This has to do with the AGA chipset. before AGA you couldn't have more
than 32 colors in a brush (EHB is not really 64 colors), so there was no
need for imagine to accept 256 color brushes.

>5) Why do im3.0 background colour zero colours not genlock? Imagine see
>to black,0,0,0 ( colour zero) in the 2nd position of the palette, so
>It will not genlock. I have set the genc colours and background colours
>to 0,0,0

I don't really know much about genlocks, but there is something in prefs
about genlock color. Try it.


Torge!r


[e-mail]

----
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   The BYTE Castle - 6988 3700 / 6988 4100 - Askim, Norway - Info-board    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #179 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Pyramid
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 94 17:36:14 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike Tucibat)

On 9-21, Milan wrote:


Also I found a bug:

try to make a mathematical pyramid: add primitive sphere with
3 circle sections and 1 vertical section, hit ok, and render
a flashing guru mediation.
===========================

        Hi Milan,

        When I tried that, it just hung my machine (A3000, 18 meg).
        Of course, it works fine if you try it with a cone...

        And somebody recently wrote about wishing for a star filter.
        LensFlar.itx from 2.9 along with FireBall.itx has given me
        excellent results.

        I want my 3.1!!!

        -mikeT
        [e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #180 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Batch Proc.
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 1994 22:21:49 -0600 (MDT)
From: MAD MAX <[e-mail]>

Does anybody have an arexx script that woud convert imagine pictures into
an ANIM file format using ADpro ??
I've made a little animation using imagine 3.0 onmy A4000/04 and I want
to send the animation to a friend of mine.

                Hesham Amiri




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #181 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Using Fircracker24 w/IM3.0...
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 01:33:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bush Doktor <[e-mail]>

On Fri, 23 Sep 1994 [e-mail] wrote:

Good deal deleted!

>     So, now I have this board. What do I do with it? I know
> Imagine can render directly to the Firecracker but have had no success
> so far. I've gone into Preferences and flipped the USFC flag to
> T. I've clicked the 'Use Firecracker' button in Project to on. So far
> nothing. I've got a Rev 2.1 board (that's what it says on the
> side). Should I be using specific presets? The manully says the the
> FC24 can be used with Quickrenders. How?

    You have to go into prefs & set QR to one of the firecracker
presets. (384 or whatever one you want)  If you are working on a
project, make sure you pick a firecracker preset size. It's the
button below where you choose if you want trace or scanline. I'm
guessing you have the cables plugged in correct. ;-)

>     On an aside, how good is Light24, or rather should I even
> bother getting the FC24 software? If it is worth getting how should I
> go about that?

     Most other paint programs are better. Light24's QR of a object
was it's only real value.

*************************************************************************
    Jah Radio    Sundays 6-12pm  K.U.O.R. 89.1fm    Host: BUSH DOKTOR
**********************\  University of Dreadlands /**********************
[e-mail]\  Blowing the FULL watts /[e-mail]
                           over nineteen years!



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #182 ***************************************:-)

Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 02:06:16 +1000
From: [e-mail]

Hi people,

somebody asked for a star filter, well the star.itx texture I sent a few days
ago (uuencoded) is just that, you can set the number of points as well as the
color of the edges. Don't use the star.itx I uploaded earlier though, it has
a bug.

Let your Imagination run wild,

Milan


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #183 ***************************************:-)

Subject: I3.1
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 11:19:27 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Rivers)

Can someone post what the new textures and effects in 3.1 are and a short
description of what they do and how well they work?

  Thanks, Mike


(I don't have an 060:)
-------------------------------------------------------
|  Commodore failure. Press mouse button to continue  |
|  Guru Meditation  $83500000     Task : $00000CBM    |
-------------------------------------------------------
            A4000/060 wow! this is fast.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #184 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Bones tutorials dates for retrieval
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 08:45:43 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Brad Molsen)

        To all, There has been so many inquiries about the "bones tutorial"
that I took some time last night and found my copies so I could give out
the dates they were posted so they could be retrieved from the Aminet
archives. I say tutorials because there are really two, one from Lesk
titled "My bones trouble" posted 5/13/94 and one that corrects and
clarifies Lesks' from Mark Decker titled "Bones lessons learned" posted
5/18/94. I have the hard copies here at work so I know the titles and dates
are correct. I don't have 3.0 yet:( but, I pulled them off the list for
future use. Myself and a friend that does have 3.0 tried them out and they
do work! Since I am at work I can't take the time to get them again out of
the archives but, I hope someone out there could help out and get them out
of the archives and repost them. Thanks again to Lesk and Mark for posting
them in the first place.
                                        regards,
                                                Brad

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Almond rocca?!! Ahhh..no thanks, I have a cat!

Brad Molsen c/o  LORAL                          [e-mail]

13810 SE Eastgate Way Suite 500                 [phone]
Bellevue, Wa 98005                              Fax: [phone]




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #185 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Pyramid
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 11:30:00 -0600 (MDT)
From: Douglas Rudd <[e-mail]>

> On 9-21, Milan wrote:
>
>
> Also I found a bug:
>
> try to make a mathematical pyramid: add primitive sphere with
> 3 circle sections and 1 vertical section, hit ok, and render
> a flashing guru mediation.
> ===========================
>
>         Hi Milan,
>
>         When I tried that, it just hung my machine (A3000, 18 meg).
>         Of course, it works fine if you try it with a cone...
>
>         And somebody recently wrote about wishing for a star filter.
>         LensFlar.itx from 2.9 along with FireBall.itx has given me
>         excellent results.
>
>         I want my 3.1!!!
>
>         -mikeT
>         [e-mail]
I tried this on 3.0 with my 3000 and it hung. Tried it on 3.1 and it said
illegal parameters-much nicer.

Doug Rudd
[e-mail]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Amiga Guide to the Galaxy refers to Commodore's management as
"A bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first to be lined up
against the wall and shot when the revolution comes."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They will get my Amiga from me when the pry it from my cold, dead hands.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #186 ***************************************:-)

Subject: States
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 14:26:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Brett Jones)

  Hello fellow Imagineers!

 I've been fooling around with States for the first time. After
spending about 8 hours trying to get an object to change thru 6
different states I've discovered a few things!

 One is that the States option of morphing doesn't keep track of
changes of the objects axis sizes. Not a big deal though, just remember
to rescale all versions of your various objects axis to match the axis
size of the one that will be your locked starting State.

 I've managed to fracture a disk as an object, and to do it at different
settings. The geometry flows beautifully over a 180 frame animation
going from one state to another.

 However, I can't seem for the life of me, to get different textures to
morph as well as the geometry?

 Does anyone else who is privy to some "State Secrets" know how to
achieve this? I've tried endless permutations of what the manual
suggests (hints at I should say) and the only result is that the
texture applied with the first (Locked) state stays with the object
all the way through the animation. It won't morph to a different
texture. Is it possible that this is impossible? Can I morph
settings of just one texture only, through various State changes?

 Eager to know !

 Thanks

Brett J.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #187 ***************************************:-)

Subject: QR versus ProjectRender, thanks
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 13:59:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (David Wyand)

Hi Mike!

> I do my quickrender, Ham laced, in stage, and it displays
>automatically.  My object has a nice grainy texture.  I render the very
>scene in the Project editor, 24bit ILBM, Ham.  I click on Show. I'm
shown
>the same scene, but my object has lost its nice grainy texture and has
>that wave phenomenon all over the surfaces. I've even tried making both
>QR and ProjectRender ILBM or RGBN, it doesn't matter: the difference
>between the two images is still pronounced.

I think I've noticed your problem by your above description.  If you are
using Laced HAM as your quickrender, why not do the same for the
Project?  When creating the project, choose from one of the defaults;
namely, the Laced HAM one.  This will set the mode to 12bit ILBM (which
is HAM) and the Laced button should be clicked.

What is happening is that your are choosing the 24-bit option bu
probably don't have the Auto Dither button depressed.  This causes the
picture to be displayed in HAM mode but with no dithering, hence the
'wave phenomenon' you describe.  I think that the best way around all
this is to just render in 12-bit ILBM as described above.

Of course, if you had ADPro, you could take the 24-bit image and convert
it to HAM, but no guarentees as to the likeness to the quickrender
picture.  This is how I do it, though, for the final render at least.

                                        -Dave
                                         [e-mail]

Questions?  Just ask...


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #188 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Random PC questions
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:57:41 -0700
From: Christopher Ivan Morris <[e-mail]>

Hello fellow Imagineers,
    I've recently shifted platforms from the Amiga to a PC.
I've got a few questions from watching the mailing list for the
past year...

    1)  Is anyone running Imagine successfully on a 90 MHz
Pentium?  This is the machine I'd like to get if possible, but
I had heard a few Pentium/Imagine interaction complaints.

    2)  Does anyone know of any other good PC anim-building
utils that support the creation of some anim formats other than
FLC? (such as MPEG, AVI, etc.)

    3)  Any video-accelerator card/Imagine horror stories out
there?  I've had problems with a miroCrystal 8s because it's not
VESA compiant.

    4)  Any one know a good dealer (and price) for the PC version
of the DPS PAR card?

    Many thanks in advance for your time.  I can be reached
at [e-mail] if neccesary.

    Chris


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #189 ***************************************:-)

Subject: DXF conversion
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 16:30:21 -0600 (MDT)
From: Douglas Rudd <[e-mail]>

Well, I have to say my hat's off to Impulse. IM3.1 has been a definite
improvement in DXF conversion! I was able to import some humanoid objects
that Interchange and even Autodesk's DXF3DS conversion package had barfed
on before. First time in, no tweeking. Good work, Impulse! Now if only the
humanoid objects had been worth all the effort :/


Doug Rudd
[e-mail]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Amiga Guide to the Galaxy refers to Commodore's management as
"A bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first to be lined up
against the wall and shot when the revolution comes."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They will get my Amiga from me when the pry it from my cold, dead hands.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #190 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Random PC questions
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 17:51:08 -0500 (CDT)
From: Cliff Lee <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 26 Sep 1994, Christopher Ivan Morris wrote:

>     2)  Does anyone know of any other good PC anim-building
> utils that support the creation of some anim formats other than
> FLC? (such as MPEG, AVI, etc.)

I've used a shareware program called DTA (Dave's Targa Animator).  It has
plenty of options and the price is right.  Works well with just about any
resolution I've tried (320 x 200 to 1024 x 768).  Should be at all your
finer graphic FTP sites.

I've used a program called DISPLAY (current version I know of is 1.8)
that will display and decompose.  I don't know if it will compose the
animation files.  I've used it to decompse a mpg.  Must have.  Probrably
found at the same place you will find DTA...

Cliff Lee           [e-mail]
"You can always make up a class,
 You can never  make up a party!"



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #191 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re:  Random PC questions
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 20:40:23 -0700
From: "Daniel T. Edwards" <[e-mail]>

I use Imagine 3.0 on a 90Mhz Pentium.  It has a Western Digital
PCI bus video card with two megs RAM.  I have experienced absolutely
no problems with this setup and Imagine.  In the last three months,
Imagine 3.0 crashed once.... just once (and I know it was my fault!)
Even though PCI is not VESA, all the imagine viewmodes are present.
The only thing I miss is multitasking and downtime.  One day, Os/2
will run Imagine in a full screen DOS session.  (hope..hope..)

 ____________________________________________________________
/                                                            \
| Pentium - 90Mhz             James R. Walker                |
| PCI Bus              [e-mail]          |
| 16Mb RAM     ______________________________________________|
| 420Mb Hard  /      Please note my new e-mail address       |
| Imagine 3.0 | I've installed OS/2 52 times. I use Windows. |
\____________________________________________________________/


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #192 ***************************************:-)

Subject: RE: HALO AROUND LIGHT IN IMAGINE
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 01:02:42 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Stephane Payette)




 On Sep 18, Steve J. Lombardi wrote:

 > I'm trying to get a nice halo of light to appear around
 > a light in imagine. let me explain. the scene is pretty dark. just
 > some ambiant light. at one end of the room is a red emergency light
 > flashing. when the camera looks at the light, I want the area around the
 > light to glow.  I've tried a few things without getting nice
 > results. ANy suggestions?? If it helps, I've got the essence textures.
 > thanks.


 > steve lombardi
 > [e-mail]




 Hi Steve!

 If you have Milan's Star texture, doing this will be quite easy.

 Put a plane in front of your emergency light; give it black color; load
 the star texture into it; keep the star radius parameter a little bit
 lower than the center radius, and enter 0 for the number of points.
 Put the edges red & render!

 There you go: halo as good as in Lightwave!

 BTW, if you just want a glow, do the same exept give the object some color.
 This will make the glow as nice as in Lightwave!




--
-------------------------------
Stephane Payette
video & 3D animations
[e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #193 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: New Lens Flare
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 22:19:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> What? Fire? Fire! FIRE!!! Hehe-hee-eh. Is there a fire texture with 3.1? Is it

> better than the fire Steve Worley made with the three Essence textures (he
> showed how in the APEX Newsletter a while ago).

Well I haven't put them side by side but can tell you this it is really
really nice! and animatable too.

=RRW=






+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #194 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Pyramid
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 22:24:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>
> Also I found a bug:

Well, if this is bug report time, I geuss I'll warn you not to try the
Global effect Melt as it will crash you quite nicely too. At least it
does me every time.

>         I want my 3.1!!!

Well, send your $100.00 in and I'm sure Impulse will be glad to send you a
copy, that is if your a regestered user of 3.0.

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #195 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Widescreen movies
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 17:17:48 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>

Can some kind Imagineer help me out??

I'm having problems creating Widescreen movie format..in the FAQ v5 it says

"        Besides making for some neat looking animations, this will also
lower rendering times.  For a render that would normally be 768x482 or
so, make it 768x380.  Leave the ratio just as it is (6:7).  Any where
from 380-330 or so will look pretty good. "

Ok so I did this ...my pic is 640 x 410 (Originally 640x512) but the
finished pic only has a black strip at the bottom of the screen. :(

Any ideas guys??


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                +
       ________ | ___________________________________STAR____________
      /         |         .              *       .   WARS       .    \
      |        / \    *           .                       .          |
      |   .    \0/           .               .      *                |
      |        | |      Michael Hazlett                  .       *   |
      |      P /^\      Earthlight Communications     .        .     |
      |    _/ \/ \      Dunedin, New Zealand                         |
      |     / |\   \                                     *       .   |
      |    / /          [e-mail]              .       |
      \______________________________________________________________/
       \  Imagine object creator - Especially Star Wars objects :)  /
        ------------------------------------------------------------






+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #196 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Repost of Bones Tutorial (LONG)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 11:47:16 -0500 (CDT)
From: Wayne Haufler <[e-mail]>

Since many of us are interested in this Bones Tutorial, and have been
asking for it, and since I found it in the archive, (thanks to the
previous poster who gave a reference to it), I am posting it now for you.
Here it is.

To keep it short, I took the liberty of correcting the original Bones Tutorial
based on the followup messages.  These corrections are noted in [] brackets.
I hope I did this right.  I have not yet played much with bones, myself.

Thanks to Lesk, Rosario Salfi, and Drew Vogel for their parts in this.

Sorry if this long message causes any problems.

             __
\\ /\\ /\\ //_    Wayne A. Haufler   [Christian/SW Engineer/XWindows/Amigan]
 \/--\// \//__    [e-mail]
     //           Unisys Space Systems - Shuttle Operations Contract
                  Hobby:  "Computer Animations For Christian Endeavors"
                  GodlyGraphics mailing list: [e-mail]

----------:x Cut Here ---------------------------------------------------

>From [e-mail] Fri May 13 20:45:52 1994
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:19:34 -0700
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Lesk)
Subject: My bones trouble
Status: O


I had some trouble with bones and it looks like several others had a little
as well so here is my version of quick bones. I claim no writing skills or
technique. This is just something some were asking about and I hope it
helps

>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 08:49:29 -0700
>To: [e-mail] (Rosario Salfi)
>From: [e-mail] (Lesk)
>Subject: Re: 3.0 Textures
>Cc: lesk
>
>>Well, why don't you just outline step by step the process by which you
>>created your own bones object (let's say a finger), set up the bones,
>>and then manipulated it.  If you can, please take care to mention every
>>little detail, since sometimes I have difficulty understanding what
>>Impulse is trying to describe, and I too have to have two or three
>>thinks about it.  Many thanks!
>>
>>Paul
>
>If this works and it makes sense maybe I will send it to the IML as well.
>
>ok I am going to be as consistant as I can and for menu items I will put it
>in the form of menu->selection->selection1 and for requesters that ask for
>input I will just say what needs to go in.
>
>Detail editor:
>add->primitive->tube
>                Radius = 30
>                Height = 300
>                circ sec = 12
>                vitr sec = 3
>        close both bottom and top.
>
>I like to work in the front view of the four.
>
>
>        ......
>        ||||||  top section             note that when I refer to a
>        ......                          section that means the points
>        ||||||  mid section             above and below are selected
>        ......
>        ||||||  base section
>        ......
>
>                                        for example the top section is
>
>                                                 ......
>                                                 ||||||
>                                                 ......  <- these points used
>                                                           twice once for top
>                                                           and once for mid
>
>
>
>
>f1 select tube
>mode->pickfaces
>mode->method->drag box
>shift select top section (points above and below)
>        function->make->makesubgroup
>        enter tip1
>        deselect faces
>shift select mid section (all points above and below mid faces)
>        function->make->makesubgroup
>        enter mid1
>        deselect faces
>shift select base section
>        function->make->makesubgroup
>        enter base1
>        deselect faces
>shift select top and mid section
>        function->make->makesubgroup
>        enter midall
>        deslect faces
>shift select top, mid, and base
>        function->make->makesubgroup
>        enter baseall
>        deselect faces
>
>If you think about this for a minute it will all make sense especially
>concerning how this thing is going to bend.
>OK next phase.
>
>mode->pick groups
>        (and go back to pick method points)
>object->add->axis
>        select tha axis
>        select move
>        move axis to center of tip1 (top section)
>        deslect axis
>object->add->axis
>        select axis
>        select move
>        move axis to center of mid1 (mid section)
>        deselect axis
>object->add->axis
>        select axis
>        select move
>        move axis to center of base1 (mid section)
>        deselect axis
>
>Now comes the tricky part the order here is very important and you may have to
>try this a few times until it works just right.
>
>use the find requester and choose the axis in the base section. doing it this
>way should make make the order correct.
>
> [ The object at this point is to set the proper order ]
>
>mode->pickobjects
>
[ Corrected Order:  ]
>select         axis for object
>        shift select     axis in base1
>        states->group
>        deselect

>select         axis in base1
>        shift select     axis in mid1
>        states->group
>        deselect

>select         axis in mid1
>        shift select     axis in tip1
>        states->group
>        deselect
>
[     What you have done here is simply grouped your axis. You now want to make
certain that these axis are in the proper order so that when you bend say
your finger, they move just like your finger would top to bottom. If they
are out of order it will still work but it would look like some double
jointed contortionist...
 ]
>go back to group mode and check this out, and make very certain that the
>order is right. click on the tip axis and it should be the only one blue.
>deslect it and click on the axis in the mid section BOTH it and tip axis
>should be highlighted. deslect them and click on the axis in base1 and all
>three axis should turn blue. now the hard part! go back to pick object mode
>and then click on the object axis. it should be blue with a yellow line
>connecting it to the base1 axis.
>        If none of the above is correct all progress is at a halt! go back
>remove all the groups and try it again this order is IMPORTANT!

[       So either clear it all out and start the project over or go back to
group mode select an axis and ungroup, repeating until everthing is
ungrouped. Make sure there are no groupings at all! Then go back to object
mode pick and sadly start again. You will get this, it just takes a little
practice. Also this is not a replacement for the manual read through it so
you have the concepts, believe me it will really help.
]
>
>now having that done correctly we can move on make sure nothing is selected
>and go back to pick group mode.
>
>select axis in tip1
>        States->bones->subgroups
>                bigsub: browse->tip1
>                smallsub: browse->tip1
>        OK
>select axis in mid1
>        States->bones->subgroups
>                bigsub: browse->midall
>                smallsub: browse->mid1
>        OK
>select axis in base1
>        States->bones->subgroups
>                bigsub: browse->baseall
>                smallsub: browse->base1
>        OK
>
>SAVE THAT SUCKER NOW!
>        If you think about this it really makes sense what has happened at
>this point.
>
>
>States->states
>        create
>        default
>        select buttons shape and grouping, the book says this will be the
>        only place you need to have this.
>        OK
>States->states
>        create
>        start
>        OK
>deselect all
>select axis tip1 and rotate in the x 30 degrees.
>space bar
>select entire object
>states->bones->update
>states->states
>        create
>        bendtip1
>        OK
>select axis in tip1 and rotate another 30 degrees in x.
>deslect all
>select axis in mid1 and rotate it in x 30 degrees.
>select entire object
>states->bones->update
>states->states->create
>        midbend
>        OK
>deslect all
>select axis in tip and rotate 30 degrees in x.
>select axis in mid and rotate 30 degrees in x.
>select axis in base and rotate 30 degrees in x.
>select entire object
>states->bones->update
>states->states->create
>        basebend
>        OK
>
>SAVE THIS AGAIN! to much work to loose....
>
>States->stateanim->make
>OK
>start
>15
>bendtip
>15
>midbend
>15
>basebend
>15
>start
>0
>full objects
>states->stateanim->play
>
>I sure hope this works for you! and if you find any errors or things that
>just don't work feel free to let me know.
>
>                                        Render Ho!
>                                          Lesk
>
=============================================================================
Drew Vogel, Admissions Officer at Univ. of Cincinnati, SysOp of The Cafe' BBS
(513-232-4895) 1:108/245, Actor, director, Amiga fan, Imagine 3.0 user, head
of BowTie Productions, documentation author, single guy, and much, much more!



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #197 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 13:33:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

>
> Ok so I did this ...my pic is 640 x 410 (Originally 640x512) but the
> finished pic only has a black strip at the bottom of the screen. :(

    Use an external viewer to view the animation files. Viewtek is
a pretty decent player. View3.2 may work better in this case. Some
players will automatically center the image on the screen. More
likely, you will have to use some sort of scrolling (with Viewtek it's
the arrow keys) to get the image into the center of the screen
vertically.

    By rendering at a lower vertical resolution you end up
creating image files that are only a custom size high (in your case
410 pixels). Most viewers will place the image at the the top left
corner of the screen. Some will only center the images
horizontally. Hence, the black space only on the bottom. Remember,
you're not rendering the letterbox black bars themselves just the
images contained within them. In essence, there is no 'black bar'
information.

    If you're not satisfied with the external viewer method (and
some viewers might give you problems) you can solve the letterbox
problem in another way. Make two planes bright and matte black. Place
these in front of any moving objects (in Stage). Use the 'Camera View'
perspective view to set the planes up. Essentially, create areas of
masking. The rendering will take a little longer, but the effect will
have been created.

    I believe another method will work. In Imagine3.0 use the 'Set
Zone' function to mask out a letterbox region. When rendering in the
Project editor tell Imagine (it will ask you) that you want to use the
Zone settings. Faster rendering times are the biggest benefit here
(it's not calculating the non-zoned areas)...

    Good luck...

                            J.---->

E-Mail: [e-mail]










+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #198 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 06:39:15 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>

<LOTS OF STUFF DELETED>

Thanks for that concise reply very handy :)

MH





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #199 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: States
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 13:45:24 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Andrey Zmievskiy)

>Brett J. wrote;
>>However, I can't seem for the life of me, to get different textures to
>>morph as well as the geometry?
>>
>>Does anyone else who is privy to some "State Secrets" know how to
>>achieve this? I've tried endless permutations of what the manual
>>suggests (hints at I should say) and the only result is that the
>>texture applied with the first (Locked) state stays with the object
>>all the way through the animation. It won't morph to a different
>>texture. Is it possible that this is impossible? Can I morph
>>settings of just one texture only, through various State changes?


Imagine 3.0 does not morph different textures, only the same texture or
colors. You can do it in Imagine 3.1, though.

Andrey



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #200 ***************************************:-)

Subject: VertiSketch objects
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 13:20:38 -0600 (MDT)
From: Douglas Rudd <[e-mail]>

I just down loaded the vs_demo from aminet/biz/demo. It contains three lw
objects- a hand, femur, and bookend (horse head). They are nicely detailed
and seem to convert to Imagine very well in Interchange (I haven't rendered
them yet as my machine at work doesn't have enough ram). I think the Verti-
Sketch 3D digitizer was reviewed in the last AW. From what I saw, it was just
too much work to be worth while (especially with a $4k price tag) but it does
produce some nice results. I hope Impulse's digitizer is much easier to use
(and still produce very good results).

To answer the next question: No I won't upload the converted objects. These
are not true pd. They are intended for LW users, but I see no problem with
individuals downloading them and converting them for PERSONAL USE only.


Doug Rudd
[e-mail]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Amiga Guide to the Galaxy refers to Commodore's management as
"A bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first to be lined up
against the wall and shot when the revolution comes."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They will get my Amiga from me when the pry it from my cold, dead hands.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #201 ***************************************:-)

Subject: LensFlar Texture (where is it?)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 17:39:50 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Joe Cotellese)

I purchased the Imagine 3.0 upgrade a few weeks ago and am now starting to
get into it.  One thing I have found is that I can't seem to locate the lens
flare texture.  According to the documentation there appears to be two lens
flare textures, one global and one not.  I could only find the global
texture.  Am I missing the other one or was it not included.  I am using the
PC version of Imagine 3.0 if that helps.

Thanks
Joe Cotellese



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #202 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Widescreen movies
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 21:28:00 -0100
From: [e-mail] (Torgeir Holm)

>Can some kind Imagineer help me out??

>I'm having problems creating Widescreen movie format..in the FAQ v5 it

>"        Besides making for some neat looking animations, this will als
>lower rendering times.  For a render that would normally be 768x482 or
>so, make it 768x380.  Leave the ratio just as it is (6:7).  Any where
>from 380-330 or so will look pretty good. "

>Ok so I did this ...my pic is 640 x 410 (Originally 640x512) but the
>finished pic only has a black strip at the bottom of the screen. :(

>Any ideas guys??

You need to use a viewer that is able to center the picture vertically.
One such viewer is Viewtek. Wide screen anims created the way you
describe play back perfectly whenever I make them.

If you want to single frame the anim to tape, you will have to add the
top black strip manually. You Could do this with an Arexx script for
ADPro or ImageFX (if you are an amiga user)


Torge!r


[e-mail]

----
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   The BYTE Castle - 6988 3700 / 6988 4100 - Askim, Norway - Info-board    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #203 ***************************************:-)

Subject: RE: HALO AROUND LIGHT IN IMAGINE
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 22:06:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Blaquiere <[e-mail]>

I'm uploading a .LHA file to wuarchive; it's an Imagine object, brushmap,
text file and sample picture which create a fake glare, similar to the
final flash of light before the Deep Space Nine wormhole closes up. Give
it a try; it may be all you need. Just make it appear for one or two
frames, every time your red emergency light flashes into the camera.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #204 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Firecracker24
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 22:02:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Blaquiere <[e-mail]>

On Sun, 25 Sep 1994 [e-mail] wrote:

> the board to work with Quickrenders, and stuff. Make sure that QUIK is set
> to Firecracker 384 (as is mine) or some other legal name found in the rend-
> ering presets. QUFF should be set to RGB8. USFC should be set to True. And
> OPAL should be set to false. Also, if the Use Firecracker button on the
> project editor screen is not on, you'll get no visible quickrender in the
> other editors. Good Luck (and what a good deal!)......Bill Graham
>

Actually, any quickrender size works; I often use Ham Quarterscreen
(160x100), since the 24-bit display is so clear I can see what's
happening without rendering a lot of pixels. In addition, QUFF can be
left as ILBM-24 (sp?) so that quickrenders can be loaded directly into
most any program; I need that at times.

Of course, with Imagine 3.0 and up you can leave QUFF at HAM or whatever,
and use Set Zone to zero in on the detail you're really interested in.



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #205 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 21:21:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Hey Michael, et al,

    I just got into letterboxing myself the other week, so your post,
Michael, is timely.

    It's thanks to Steve Worley's great book, Undermining the
Menagery, that I got back into experimenting with letterbox formats.

    To prevent distortion of my objects by the change of screen size,
I found myself having to reset the pixel ratio.  It's probably up to the
individual project, but I ended up using 12 by 12.

    The way I got it centered, after the frames were rendered to the
desired 'undersize,' was to let another program process them into an
anim.  Buildanim seems to be the tool of choice here.  I batch-processed
them as they were rendered in Imagine with that other great tool, Rend24,
then used Buildanim to compile them into an anim.

    Then, whatever kind of viewer I use, they're already centered,
with the nice letterbox black at top and bottom.

    (Hope this helps, and is not as blathery as it sounds when I
reread it).


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #206 ***************************************:-)

Subject: textures.lha unencoded amiga IM30 (clipmap,cliptran,brghtmap,star)
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 04:35:12 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Stephane Payette)






begin 777 textures.lha
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M#W0>X[\<T:=ZX-4&IN0CY8(C:)AV$NDYC:GM!]F[!.ILKAZA+6QH-2W9 P
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>HCDW8G03X[(^K$B)@NF>_$#8RV5:TRA8?L0GSJ

end


--
-------------------------------
Stephane Payette
video & 3D animations
[e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #207 ***************************************:-)

Subject: RE: HALO AROUND LIGHT IN IMAGINE
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 04:31:03 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Stephane Payette)


> Thanks. Are these textures commercial or shareware?? if shareware,
> are they on Aminet? If you know the filename that would be most helpful.

> thanks-

> steve lombardi


 These textures are PD. There are made by Milan Polle (here on IML).
 His address his [e-mail]

 You will find some of his textures on IML in a text format, once in a while.

 If you use an Amiga, use UUxT-GUI to decode them.

 I am sending you those i got yet.


 For all others who dont have them yet, they are REALY worth to grab!


--
-------------------------------
Stephane Payette
video & 3D animations
[e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #208 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Texture Problems 2.0
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 03:34:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Olivares - PHAM/F94 <[e-mail]>

    Okay, I've made a 10x10x10 grid of primitive tubes.  I've grouped
them all together and applied a texture to them.  For some reason,
quickrender gives me error messages when I try to render.  When I render
in the Project editor, I get tubes in either the z plane or the x and y
plane, but not all three.  I tried ungrouping the tubes and joining them
together.  Now quickrender doesn't have enough ram, and the project
editor yields the same result.  The image I see in wire frame in detail
and stage looks fine.  Anybody have any ideas??

Thanx.
Mindflux    [e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #209 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 94 10:43:26 EDT
From: [e-mail]

On 9-28, Mike Hazlett wrote:

T> On Tue, 27 Sep 1994, Mike McCool wrote:
T>
T> > Hey Michael, et al,
T> >
T> > I just got into letterboxing myself the other week, so your post,
T> > Michael, is timely.
T> >
T> > It's thanks to Steve Worley's great book, Undermining the
T> > Menagery, that I got back into experimenting with letterbox formats.
T> >
T>
T> Yeah I found Steve's explanation a bit intense :}
T>
T> so if you could simplify it for me :)
T>
T> MH
=========================

        May I?

        When you letterbox, you're essentially cropping the image
        vertically.  Which is why Steve W. recommends widening the
        shot.  Of course, the difference between widening via zoom
        vs y-axis is still in effect.

        High res pixel aspect is 6/7, and doesn't come into play.

        I still use dctv, and I get a nice widescreen effect with
        688x352.

        -mikeT

        (Have we got enough Mikes on this thread?!)



* Offline Orbit 0.70b * ...Sleep is a poor substitute f


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #210 ***************************************:-)

Date: Wed, 28 Sep 94 17:19:10 MDT
From: [e-mail] (Paul Claessens)

Hello to all,
    I have a question which has, I think, already been answered on this
mailinglist, but since I don't know the asnwer (yet), I'm gonna ask it
anyway...
For a project we want to buy a PC to just render our work on (since a amiga
is unfortunatly too expensive at the moment....), but we have already done
some work on the amiga. We wanted to start using the Essence textures, cause
we heard they were GREAT...  But they couldn"t tell us where they are
available and if they are also available on PC...
They could only tell us that they were there for the AMIGA. If not, which I
hope not, do there exist other texture packages for both AMIGA and PC???

I also would like to know if Imagine works on a PC with a pentium board in it
and if it makes a REAL difference, compared to no accalarator...
What I'm trying to say, is it worth the extra money to buy a pentium just
for rendering with Imagine???

I hope anyone can tell me...

With many thanks...
                    \|/
                    ~ ~
                       o` 'o
                    ( )
                 ___.oO    \___/    Oo.___
                    #            ...PaulC




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #211 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 12:14:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

>
>     To prevent distortion of my objects by the change of screen size,
> I found myself having to reset the pixel ratio.  It's probably up to the
> individual project, but I ended up using 12 by 12.

    Ahhhh, but the whole ratio thing is strictly for the pixels
only. I may be rehashing what people already know here...

    Speaking in a strictly NTSC sense the Amiga's standard screen
is 640 x 400. The same standard screen on a PC would be 640 x 480. Why
the discrepancy? The pixel ratios on the two machines are
different. The Amiga's standard pixel ratio is around 6:7, so Amiga
pixels are slightly taller than they are wide. The PC's pixel ratio is
1:1. They're exactly square. A 12:12 ratio, as mentioned above, is
exactly the same as a 1:1. So if you're rendring to a PC medium by all
means do this.
    Imagine only asks for pixel ratios not screen aspect
ratios. If we were talking about that then the standard TV/Monitor
screen aspect ratio would be 4:3. A wider format, a letterbox format,
would be around 16:9. If you do the calculations you'll see that 4:3
aspect ratios yield a 1.3333 times increase in horizontal image size
versus the vertical. A 16:9 aspect would be 1.7777 times wider than
vertical.

    Imagine's rendering parameters take into account pixel ratios
and screen pixel sizes. If you set the ratio to 6:7 then everything
you render will render out in the correct Amiga pixel aspect. Things
will look normal. It doesn't matter what the image sizes are. You
could have a 640 x 10 screen and the image wouldn't be compressed or
expanded. You just end up with 390 less vertical lines. All that
information gets cut off.
    By correcting to a 12:12 (or essentially a 1:1) you just
stretch the image slightly vertically on the Amiga. Cutting down on
vretival resolution won't change anything. Imagine's Width and Height
requesters don't affect pixel ratios.

    A caveat with working on a letterbox project is the lack of
the top and bottom. It's not a problem, really. You just have to
remember to limit your action to the center portion of the screen
(vertically, that is). I know Lightwave puts two lines on the layout
screens to indicate where the letterboxing begins and ends. You just
restrict your action to within these lines. The same can obviously be
done with Imagine and dummy objects.

    Sorry to be so forth about this. It's just that I went through
a lot of trial end error long ago before I realized that the pixel
ratios just affected the pixels. Actually, I had never really thought
of them as 'pixel" ratios, per se. I don't know what I was thinking...

    Of course, if you're working on a PC then the 1:1 ratio will
work just fine... I hope some of what I just said is understandable...

    I don't know about the whole pixel ratio deal for PALers. Is
it the same 6:7? I don't know, or think so. Perhaps a 1:1 is correct
for PAL...

                            J.---->

E-Mail: [e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #212 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 05:05:52 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 28 Sep 1994 [e-mail] wrote:

> >
>     Speaking in a strictly NTSC sense the Amiga's standard screen
> is 640 x 400. The same standard screen on a PC would be 640 x 480. Why

Well I tried using Viewtek but still no go...I still have a black line at
the bottom of the screen BUT none at the top :}

Can anyone solve this problem...my pic was originally 640X512(PAL) but the
FAQ says to reduce the height by 100 so I render in 640X410(PAL) but I
only get the black line at the bottom...Any takers?

MH





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #213 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Repost: Bones lessons learned
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 94 10:14:00 PDT
From: "Decker, Mark" <[e-mail]>

I've seen so many requests for this lately, I thought I'd repost it.  This
was a follow on to Lesk's original bones tutorial, which unfortunately I did
not save.  Enjoy!
 ----------
First, thanks to Lesk for his bones example description.  I read through it
yesterday and went home to try it out from memory when I finally got back to
my Amiga.  I stumbled a couple times in the process, but I learned a few
things that might help somebody else along.

1.    When grouping axes together into bones, make sure you are in Pick
Objects mode, not Pick Groups.

2.    Make sure you are using the STATES Group command, not the Object Group
command.

3.    Once you are in Pick Objects, pick first the parent axis, then the
child axis.  In Lesk's tube example, if the axes are numbered from top to
bottom, first pick axis number two, then hold down shift and pick axis
number one and group.  Next pick axis number three, then hold down shift and
pick axis number 2, and so on down, selecting the object itself followed by
the "root" bone and grouping them last.  When I first tried this I was using
the bounding box to pick both axes at once, and I think it may have been
picking them in the wrong order.

4.    It helps immensely to move any axes out of the way (shift M moves the
axis of an object but leaves the object in place) so that they do not
overlap while grouping.  Once the grouping is correct, you can move the axis
back into place without affecting the grouping.

5.    Subgroup assignment is probably the trickiest procedure and was at the
start the hardest part for me to grasp.  It has not been well explained to
date, but I'll see if I can help without muddying the waters any further
:-).  Each axis gets two subgroups assigned to it, helpfully referred to as
"Big" and "Small".  To the best of my understanding, the Big subgroup is the
set of all faces which will be affected by motion of the axis.  If a face is
not in the Big subgroup, its never going to change no matter what that
particular axis does.  The Small subgroup is a subset of the Big subgroup,
which means it can only contain faces which are also in the Big subgroup,
but usually won't contain all of them.  The Small subgroup moves and rotates
with the axis, but all of its faces keep their shape and orientation with
respect to each other.
      So if the faces outside the Big subgroup don't change, and the faces
inside the Small subgroup don't change shape, all that's left is the faces
which ARE in the Big subgroup, but ARE NOT in the Small subgroup.  These
faces form the actual joint, and actually stretch and deform to keep the
other two sets (the outside and the Small subgroup) smoothly connected.
    Maybe an example will help.  Think of a robotoid arm with no fingers, no
wrist.  It has two parts, a forearm and an upper arm, and hence two bones
(axes).  The parent axis (bone) sits at the center of the shoulder, with its
Z axis pointing at the elbow.  The child axis sits at the center of the
elbow, with its Z axis pointing at what in a more highly evolved robotoid
would be the hand.
    You need two subgroups for each bone.  Lets start with the forearm.  The
Big subgroup for the forearm will include all of the forearm and just a
little of the upper arm above the elbow, enough to allow the joint to
stretch to maintain a smooth connection.  The Small subgroup will contain
most of the forearm, up to just below the elbow.  The faces around the elbow
which are in the Big subgroup but are not in the Small subgroup will be the
ones which stretch and deform to allow the joint to connect smoothly.
    On the upper arm, the Big subgroup will contain all of the forearm, all
of the upper arm, and a little of the shoulder it is attached to.  The Small
subgroup contains all of the forearm, and most of the upper arm up to just
below the shoulder.  Again, it is the faces between these two where all of
the deformation takes place.

6.    Once your grouping is all set up, go back to Pick Groups and pick the
actual object which is the parent of all these bones.  All the axes should
be turn blue (in the default color scheme) to indicate that they have been
picked as well.  Then create your "DEFAULT" state, being sure to select both
Shape and Groups.  You may need to select properties as well if you want to
do brush or texture tacking, but I'm still having problems with this myself,
so I'm not sure.

7.    In order to manipulate the bones, you need to be in Pick Groups mode.
 You have to pick the axis you want to manipulate, rotate (or move??) it,
and accept the change.  To see the result you have to pick the base object
again (still in Group mode) and select Update Bones and it will then warp
your object to conform to the new bone positions.

This has gotten a lot more long winded than I intended, but I hope it helps
clarify a few things for someone.

Mark Decker

[e-mail]
Software Engineer
Sega of America Inc.

If Sega thought I had thoughts, they would certainly disavow all knowledge
of them.



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #214 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 12:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike McCool <[e-mail]>

Well, Michael, et all,

    This is weird.  Especially as I'm one of those who assured you
ViewTek would work for you.  I just rendered a quicky letterbox image and
viewed it inside, with Imagine's viewer, and the black is all at the
bottom.  Fine, I knew it would do this.

    I tried looking at the same pic with ViewTek, and again, the
black was all at the bottom, instead of halved across the top and bottom.
Again, no surprise.

     So then I tried processing that same pic with Rend24, as I
suggested you do, then viewed it again, with VT.  AGAIN, the black was
all at athe bottom.

    Just occurred to me:  I'm usually dealing in anims, not stills.
Lemme go right quick and animate this same letterbox project . . .

    OK, that's it.  When I render the stills as 24bitILBM's, process
them with Rend24, then use Buildanim to make the anim, when I view the
resultant anim with VT, it's properly letterboxed.

    The problem with this method is obvious:  once Rend24's done
processing them, the pix are no longer 24bit.

    And not all viewers seem to letterbox properly.  VT and rtap work
fine, but Superview and BigAnm end up showing all the black at the bottom
again.





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #215 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 94 19:55:27 EDT
From: [e-mail]

T> Well I tried using Viewtek but still no go...I still have a black line at
T> the bottom of the screen BUT none at the top :}
T>
T> Can anyone solve this problem...my pic was originally 640X512(PAL) but the
T> FAQ says to reduce the height by 100 so I render in 640X410(PAL) but I
T> only get the black line at the bottom...Any takers?
================

        Hi, Mike:

        I do all this kind of stuff in AdPro.  Hard to believe, but
        it doesn't have an auto center function.  I wrote this one
        that I attached to a button in v2.5, but should work with
        any version.  You can use any screen size you want for the
        backdrop.  Your pic will center, and composite 100% on  a
        black backdrop.

        -mikeT


/*                     CENTERPIC           */
ADDRESS "ADPro"
OPTIONS RESULTS

XSIZE
x1 = ADPRO_RESULT

YSIZE
y1 = ADPRO_RESULT

SAVER "TEMP" "XXX" RAW

LOADER "BACKDROP" "XXX" 736 482 COLOR

XSIZE
x2 = ADPRO_RESULT

YSIZE
y2 = ADPRO_RESULT

a = TRUNC((x2 - x1) / 2, 0)
b = TRUNC((y2 - y1) / 2, 0)

LOADER "TEMP" "XXX" a b

EXIT



* Offline Orbit 0.70b * ...Sleep is a poor substitute for Raytracing...
ÿÿÿÿ


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #216 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: LensFlar Texture (where is it?)
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 19:43:58 -0600 (MDT)
From: Roger Straub <[e-mail]>

On Tue, 27 Sep 1994, Joe Cotellese wrote:

> get into it.  One thing I have found is that I can't seem to locate the lens
> flare texture.  According to the documentation there appears to be two lens
> flare textures, one global and one not.  I could only find the global
> texture.  Am I missing the other one or was it not included.  I am using the
> PC version of Imagine 3.0 if that helps.
>
> Thanks
> Joe Cotellese

The LensFlar.itx texture has been changed to the Star.itx texture,
because Impulse didn't want to confuse it with the Global effect.

See ya,
    Roger


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #217 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Firecracker 24
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 94 01:49:00 UTC
From: [e-mail]

More fc24 info: if you've ordered the constant update, and have Imagine
3.1, the new Show Pic command will load and display 24bit imagery on the
Firecracker. Very nice.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #218 ***************************************:-)

Subject: re ripples(not)
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 94 13:16:13 EST
From: [e-mail]

 Howdy.
 Well this seems weird to me. Namely, I have had the ripple effect working
many times under 2.0 but now under 3.0 I get a great looking wireframe of
the rippled plane in the stage, but when I render from the project - no
effect, no glorious waves rolling across the sea. The differance between
when it worked (back in 2.0 days) and what I am doing now, is that I am
using a bump texture across the plane... Could this be the reason that its
screwing up. What are the known limitations of the ripple effect. Thought I
would ask the question before I go into post mortem mode and try all the
other variations.

What I am trying to do is get a nice bumpy cycling ocean effect - you know
the simple setup - a reasonably dense plane for the ocean- a nice brushmap
of the sky as a background - global map, fog and carefull moody lighting.

The hardest bit though is how to get a good morphable bump sequence that
looks like water ? Any takers.

David Haines
College of Fine Arts
Phone: +61 +2 +339-9555
Fax:   +61 +2 +339-9506





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #219 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Widescreen movies
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 94 21:43:00 -0100
From: [e-mail] (Torgeir Holm)

>I don't know about the whole pixel ratio deal for PALers. Is
>it the same 6:7? I don't know, or think so. Perhaps a 1:1 is correct
>for PAL...

I use imagine 3.1 pal, and the aspect ratio that works well is 18:17.
Impulse changed this to 11:10 in version 3.0, but the former works
better in my projects.


Torge!r


[e-mail]

----
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   The BYTE Castle - 6988 3700 / 6988 4100 - Askim, Norway - Info-board    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #220 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 18:28:46 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 28 Sep 1994 [e-mail] wrote:

>         I do all this kind of stuff in AdPro.  Hard to believe, but
>         it doesn't have an auto center function.  I wrote this one
>         that I attached to a button in v2.5, but should work with
>         any version.  You can use any screen size you want for the
>         backdrop.  Your pic will center, and composite 100% on  a
>         black backdrop.

Thanks for that Mike I'll try it out and get back to you :) thanks

MH





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #221 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 14:34:15 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hazlett <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 28 Sep 1994 [e-mail] wrote:

>         May I?

You may :)

>
>         When you letterbox, you're essentially cropping the image
>         vertically.  Which is why Steve W. recommends widening the
>         shot.  Of course, the difference between widening via zoom
>         vs y-axis is still in effect.
>
>         High res pixel aspect is 6/7, and doesn't come into play.
>
>         I still use dctv, and I get a nice widescreen effect with
>         688x352.
>
>         -mikeT
>
>         (Have we got enough Mikes on this thread?!)
>

I think we need more Mikes :) But yeah..I use DCTV so I'll try that out
and get back thanks :)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                +
       ________ | ___________________________________STAR____________
      /         |         .              *       .   WARS       .    \
      |        / \    *           .                       .          |
      |   .    \0/           .               .      *                |
      |        | |      Michael Hazlett                  .       *   |
      |      P /^\      Earthlight Communications     .        .     |
      |    _/ \/ \      Dunedin, New Zealand                         |
      |     / |\   \                                     *       .   |
      |    / /          [e-mail]              .       |
      \______________________________________________________________/
       \  Imagine object creator - Especially Star Wars objects :)  /
        ------------------------------------------------------------






+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #222 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Texture Problems 2.0
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 00:02:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>     Okay, I've made a 10x10x10 grid of primitive tubes.  I've grouped
> them all together and applied a texture to them.  For some reason,
> quickrender gives me error messages when I try to render.  When I render
> in the Project editor, I get tubes in either the z plane or the x and y
> plane, but not all three.  I tried ungrouping the tubes and joining them
> together.  Now quickrender doesn't have enough ram, and the project
> editor yields the same result.  The image I see in wire frame in detail
> and stage looks fine.  Anybody have any ideas??

Ya, buy some more ram...I think thats your problem 2.0 will not warn you
if you do not have enough to render everything, but will cause odd effects
such as you explaned above.

=RRW=




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #223 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Repost: Bones lessons learned
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 00:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

> 1.    When grouping axes together into bones, make sure you are in Pick
> Objects mode, not Pick Groups.

Actually you don't have to be in Objects mode though it is easier. I have
used Groups mode many time. All you need to do it select an axis, then
select the next axis and press R/A_G. Then just click the mouse anywhere on
the screen to unselect them all and start at your next axis for your next
set of axis.

> 2.    Make sure you are using the STATES Group command, not the Object Group
> command.

The States Grouping command is the Objects Grouping command, there is not
one for each. Basically there is no States Grouping command, they just
moved it to the States Menu. pressing R/A_G will work fine.

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #224 ***************************************:-)

Subject:       Imagine CD-Rom: isnt it out???
Date:          Thu, 29 Sep 1994 09:41:29 GMT+1
From: "Wizard" <[e-mail]>

 ___
| O |    .MODEL SMALL
|   |    .DATA
| O |    LOGIN   DB "              _    __  ___  ______Wizard logged in"
|   |    .CODE
| O | MAILING    PROC FAR
|/\_|

Every1 high,
        I  have a simple question: have  Impulse  already  released  the
CD-Rom with "advanced Imagine features & tips"?

 /\_
| O |    RET
|   | MAILING    ENDP                                          T-H-A-N-X
| O |    STACK   200H                                          ae(-_^)ue
|___| END        MAILING         _    __   ___  ______Wizard signing off



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #225 ***************************************:-)

Subject:       "Extreme Textures" wanted
Date:          Thu, 29 Sep 1994 09:40:47 GMT+1
From: "Wizard" <[e-mail]>

 ___
| O |    .MODEL SMALL
|   |    .DATA
| O |    LOGIN   DB "              _    __  ___  ______Wizard logged in"
|   |    .CODE
| O | MAILING    PROC FAR
|/\_|

Every1 high,
        I'm searching for the  full "Extreme Textures"  series  (humans,
stones, woods, fabrics,......):  could  someone show me an  anonFTP site
were I can find them? Could someone  uuencode me  them? The textures are
are upped to "Hall  of  fame BBS"  but  I  havent a  modem to  d/l  them
(0046/910/26665 Hall of fame).

 /\_
| O |    RET
|   | MAILING    ENDP                                          T-H-A-N-X
| O |    STACK   200H                                          ae(-_^)ue
|___| END        MAILING         _    __   ___  ______Wizard signing off



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #226 ***************************************:-)

Subject:       Im3.0PC Textures failures
Date:          Thu, 29 Sep 1994 09:39:38 GMT+1
From: "Wizard" <[e-mail]>

 ___
| O |    .MODEL SMALL
|   |    .DATA
| O |    LOGIN   DB "              _    __  ___  ______Wizard logged in"
|   |    .CODE
| O | MAILING    PROC FAR
|/\_|

Every1 high,
        I've got many probs managing Imagine v3.0 PC textures:
1]  how the  "ring select"  option  can  vary  the texture results (I've
    tryed many different settings obtaining always the same effects)?!?!
2]  clrnoiz2 and filnoiz2 wont work,  I have tryed these  with different
    settings and shapes (sphere, plane with normal and properly oriented
    z axis, tube....), and also with scanline or trace rendering methods.


Please note Validate v0.4 McAfee reports:

          File Name:  filnoiz2.itx    twinkle.itx    clrnoiz2.itx
               Size:  3,408           3,404          3,408
               Date:  4-13-1994       4-13-1994      4-13-1994
File Authentication:
     Check Method 1 - 5A80            5ADA           4BF1
     Check Method 2 - 151D            0E21           049A

 /\_
| O |    RET
|   | MAILING    ENDP                                          T-H-A-N-X
| O |    STACK   200H                                          ae(-_^)ue
|___| END        MAILING         _    __   ___  ______Wizard signing off



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #227 ***************************************:-)

Subject: PS Fonts: Metamorphosis wanted
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 94 12:28:21 CET
From: cjo <[e-mail]>

Wizard wrote;
>Yaba daba doo Imagineers,
>        this   email  is  destinated  to   people  who  can  provide  me
>Metamorphosis (PC font manager software - isnt this shareware? I dunno!)
>or to Amiga fellows (or PCs) that can provide me some PS Adobe Type I.

There are LOADS of such fonts on Aminet (/text/fonts/AT1Fonts-***.lha).
If you don't have ftp-access, ask here again or mail me if you like.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
|   Conny Joensson   |   Swedish Space Corp. Esrange            |
|   Kiruna           |   Satellite operations - Telecom Div.    |
|   Sweden           |   [e-mail]              |
-----------------------------------------------------------------


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #228 ***************************************:-)

Subject:       Imagine 4 everybody!
Date:          Thu, 29 Sep 1994 09:39:02 GMT+1
From: "Wizard" <[e-mail]>

 ___
| O |    .MODEL SMALL
|   |    .DATA
| O |    LOGIN   DB "              _    __  ___  ______Wizard logged in"
|   |    .CODE
| O | MAILING    PROC FAR
|/\_|

From: Wizard
To: Anders Lattermann
Subject: Imagine 4 everybody!
InterNet: [e-mail]



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/project
"Display preview of image while computing; halt rendering when part  way
through; continue rendering a halted partial scene later; render partial
image (i.e: start/end tracing at  columns  and  rows  number);  in other
words: POVRAY options!!!"



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/detail
"Total Internal Reflection (TIR) box into attribs requester"



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/detail
"Revamped point editing, mirror function, UV mapping ala Caligari v2.1.
Circular bend, wrapping shrink functions, rail extrude and morphed  rail
extrusion ala Real3d; then what about these stuffs and skew function?"



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/detail
"What  about  primitives  like  blob,  bicubic  patch,  quadric,   cubic
quartic and circles of arc??"



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/detail
"We all _NEED_ real  free  form  editing, we _NEED_ non-uniform rational
b-splines, we _NEED_ N.U.R.B.S."



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/detail
"Remember: ITALIANS DO IT BETTER!!! and Guido Quaroni, author of Morphus
(known also as PoNgO) did  non-linear  trasformations  (bend,  twist...)
better than Imagine programmers!!!!"



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/stage
"Quaternion-base spline animation ala Caligari v2.1"



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/stage
"Pan, dolly, roll  functions for cameras with real  time  (bounding  box
*SHIT*) results into perspective window:  have u ever seen 3dstudio????"



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/stage
"Possibility to change hotspot and fallof values  for  spot lights  into
stage  editor  (with  also  all  other  functions like tracking  already
implemented into Imagine)"



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/project
"We all PC user _WANT_ support for impulse RGB pics file format:  just a
simple converter to manipulate them."



Imagine 4 everybody!/idea/misc
"What  about  ~LESS  WORDS  AND  MORE  FACTS~????  There  are  too  many
proclamations from Impulse, too many _OLD_  new  features  in  the  last
release of Imagine:
-  states???  we can live without them!
-  bones???   3dstudio has hierarchy animation from the first version!
-  brush tacking???  this is another old stuff
-  applique???   just a povray feature!
-  deform tool???   a bad copy of caligari one
-  lens flare???   no comment!!?!
-  particle???   puah! nothing compares real3d
-  terrain editor and texturator???   where are these?!?!?
there arent any new features u can laugh IT'S A MIRACLE!!!  and  all  is
realized often bad"



Imagine 4 everybody!/bugpc/detail
"wrinkle, clrnoiz2 and filnoiz2  wont  work,  I  have  tryed these  with
different settings and shapes  (sphere, plane with normal  and  properly
oriented z axis, tube....),  and  also with scanline  or trace rendering
methods.  All I obtained is a x*y blank screen; I use Imagine v3.0 PC"



Imagine 4 everybody!/bugpc/detail
"I _WANT_ TGA color mapped,  TGA true  color  (RGB), TIFF  color mapped,
JPEG, GIF, PCX  (all these  with  or  without any kind of  compression -
except  JPEG obviously!)  support for applique and brush mapping: we all
PC users are being frustrated"



Imagine 4 everybody!/bugpc/detail
"_FORGIVE_ I  and  all  PC  users  converts their dummies 2.0 attributes
files!  Impulse make the bug and Impulse _MUST_  remedy  it!!!   I  mean
converting the amiga Imagine attributes into PC red shifted ones and now
do the reverse step, converting edited atts into 3.0 right file formats:
if Motorola and Intel processors have  different  file managing, it isnt
my problem, it's a problem for the bad guys at Impulse"



Imagine 4 everybody!/bugpc/detail
"It  seems  a  strange  request  but  PC  users _NEED_ AutoCAD  DXF  and
3DStudio 3DS file conversion!?!?"



Imagine 4 everybody!/bugpc/misc
"I cannot use properly the  redirection  of  quickrender files:  <<ERROR
RENAMING FILE>> is the message I get"



Imagine 4 everybody!/bugpc/misc
"Lets try this:
-add a sphere;
-change the reflect sphere attrib to 255,255,255;
-add a plane;
-add a texture dots with filter 255,255,255 (into atts requester or into
 the dots texture requester) to the plane;
-move the sphere behind the plane;
-render with scanline option: no prob;
-render with full trace methods: the sphere will be black, no reflection,
 no other attributes - z-buffering problem I think!?!?!"

 /\_
| O |    RET
|   | MAILING    ENDP                                          T-H-A-N-X
| O |    STACK   200H                                          ae(-_^)ue
|___| END        MAILING         _    __   ___  ______Wizard signing off


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #229 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 11:25:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]

>
> Well I tried using Viewtek but still no go...I still have a black line at
> the bottom of the screen BUT none at the top :}
>
> Can anyone solve this problem...my pic was originally 640X512(PAL) but the
> FAQ says to reduce the height by 100 so I render in 640X410(PAL) but I
> only get the black line at the bottom...Any takers?


    If you render the image at 640 x 410 you still have do
something about the lack of black information at the top. Imagine
never renders it. The best method I've found (works real sweet, too)
is to use the Set Zone function to 'letterbox' out an area. Render in
full screen (640 x 512). Imagine will create the black areas, but it
won't calculate any information outside of the Zone. Therefore, you
get a beautiful letterbox result with little effort...

    However, if you don't have 3.0+ then you can't use Zone
Rendering. If you use Viewtek you will still have to manually move the
240 x 410 image to center vertically. Do this with the arrow keys (or
maybe it's CNTRL + Arrow Keys). If you only need to play ANIM5s (the
most widely recognized format) from memory then use View3.2. View3.2
might work better because you can reposition the screen (via arrow
keys), and the background will stay black. I think VT actually pulls
down its screen, so the next deep screen becomes visible. Not good...

    Apart from that, if you've got AdPro, I'd say use the script
that was posted here earlier. I don't have AdPro so this isn't an
option for me...

    There are two ways of approaching the problem. Create a black
area at the top, or manually move the image down when viewing...

    Good Luck...

                            J.---->

E-Mail: [e-mail]



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #230 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Widescreen movies (Labyrinth)
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 94 09:25:31 PDT
From: [e-mail]

Bradley Schenck ([e-mail]) created a CD-ROM-only game for
Amigas (any Amiga with a CD-ROM drive, or CDTV, or CD32 (and there
are also PeeCee and Mac versions) called "Labyrinth of Time",
which is published by Electronic Arts and is in stores.  All of
the artwork/scenery/settings on this graphical adventure game
was rendered on Amigas using Imagine 2.0.  It is all rendered in
"wide-screen" format since the bottom third or so of the screen
contains messages and a navigational bar of buttons.

Perhaps Brad can be coaxed into explaining his wide-screen technique
if you email him. I don't know if he monitors this list.

If you want to see what Imagine is capable of in the hands of someone
who has so much artistic talent you can get a little just by being
in the same room with him for a few minutes, buy Labyrinth and
have a look.

Harv
[e-mail]


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #231 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: LW PC ported???
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 12:00:42 -0600 (MDT)
From: Douglas Rudd <[e-mail]>

Not yet. LW4.0 is coming to Windoooozzzz, The New Testiment perhaps around
end of the year. Much speculation on what happens with LW's arexx macros
and 3rd party modules. LW4.0 may not run too well in Windooozzzz 3.1 or
Chicago (no problem, it won't be out until 1999, right?). But who cares?
Imagine 3.1 is here right now.



Doug Rudd
[e-mail]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Amiga Guide to the Galaxy refers to Commodore's management as
"A bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first to be lined up
against the wall and shot when the revolution comes."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They will get my Amiga from me when the pry it from my cold, dead hands.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #232 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re:Essence PC textures
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 94 14:17:40 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Joe Cotellese)

>For a project we want to buy a PC to just render our work on (since a amiga
>is unfortunatly too expensive at the moment....), but we have already done
>some work on the amiga. We wanted to start using the Essence textures, cause
>we heard they were GREAT...  But they couldn"t tell us where they are
>available and if they are also available on PC...
>They could only tell us that they were there for the AMIGA. If not, which I
>hope not, do there exist other texture packages for both AMIGA and PC???
>
>I also would like to know if Imagine works on a PC with a pentium board in it
>and if it makes a REAL difference, compared to no accalarator...
>What I'm trying to say, is it worth the extra money to buy a pentium just
>for rendering with Imagine???

Actually, I have not come across Essence for PC textures.  Last I heard they
were planning on doing them.  I haven't been able to get a hold of Apex
software to verify this.  One thing to consider is IM3.1.  It comes with
some AMAZING textures many of which rival the Essence textures.

Yes, Imagine PC does work with Pentiums.  I have a 60 and a 66Mhz.  It is
very very very very (did I say verify) fast.  If time is money (and when
isn't it) then definetely spend the extra couple hundred bucks for a Pentium.

Joe Cotellese



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #233 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Imagine 4 everybody!
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 94 13:31:37 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Andrey Zmievskiy)

>-  states???  we can live without them!

States are a great help. Less clutter, more efficient than having multiple
copies of the object.

>-  bones???   3dstudio has hierarchy animation from the first version!

Bones are much more than just hierarchy. Have you ever tried using them?
Seems like you haven't.

>-  brush tacking???  this is another old stuff

So what? It's useful.

>-  applique???   just a povray feature!

You mean heightfields? In Imagine you can apply applique function to any
object, not just plane, like in POV-Ray. Get real.

>-  deform tool???   a bad copy of caligari one

It'll get better.

>-  lens flare???   no comment!!?!

Why not? Haven't used it?

>-  particle???   puah! nothing compares real3d

Then don't use Imagine, use Real3D, which is really S-L-O-W, in my opinion.

>there arent any new features u can laugh IT'S A MIRACLE!!!  and  all  is
>realized often bad"

Then why did you get Imagine? Stick to Real 3D if you like it so much.

>"wrinkle, clrnoiz2 and filnoiz2  wont  work,  I  have  tryed these  with
>different settings and shapes  (sphere, plane with normal  and  properly
>oriented z axis, tube....),  and  also with scanline  or trace rendering
>methods.  All I obtained is a x*y blank screen; I use Imagine v3.0 PC"

Works fine for me. You should've made more effort and pay closer attention
to what you were doing.

I don't think that the tone of your message will convince Impulse to
implement all that you want. You should've suggested the changes, not
demanded them. If you can't communicate politely, be quiet.

Andrey




+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #234 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Imagine 4 everybody!
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 94 16:52:24 EST
From: [e-mail] (Michael Rivers)

Here's my suggestion...

Light Maps.(not bright maps)...
   The ability to use a brushmap to mask off a lightsource
   (without ray-tracing). Would be similar to putting a transparency
   map on a sphere and putting a light in to sphere and tracing, but
   without the sphere and in scanline also.
-------------------------------------------------------
|  Commodore failure. Press mouse button to continue  |
|  Guru Meditation  $83500000     Task : $00000CBM    |
-------------------------------------------------------
            A4000/060 wow! this is fast.


+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #235 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Imagine 4 everybody!
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 23:42:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Randy R. Wall" <[e-mail]>

>
> I don't think that the tone of your message will convince Impulse to
> implement all that you want. You should've suggested the changes, not
> demanded them. If you can't communicate politely, be quiet.
>
> Andrey

I agree with you Andrey, this guy doesn't sound like he even knows what
he's talking about. Let alone tried to actually use any of the things he
has critasized.

=RRW=





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #236 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Essence PC textures
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 15:24:58 -0600 (MDT)
From: Douglas Rudd <[e-mail]>

> Actually, I have not come across Essence for PC textures.  Last I heard they
> were planning on doing them.  I haven't been able to get a hold of Apex
> software to verify this.  One thing to consider is IM3.1.  It comes with
> some AMAZING textures many of which rival the Essence textures.
>
> Yes, Imagine PC does work with Pentiums.  I have a 60 and a 66Mhz.  It is
> very very very very (did I say verify) fast.  If time is money (and when
> isn't it) then definetely spend the extra couple hundred bucks for a Pentium.
>
> Joe Cotellese
>
>
The last I heard was that the PC port of Essence was on indefinite hold.
Apex is probably very busy porting Essence textures to LW4.0. The complaint
they made about IM30-PC was the difficulty in getting the standards from
Impulse.

The point about IM31 having more than enough great textures is a good one.
The reason we might like to see Essence on the PC (from the Amiga standpoint)
is for compatibility. I believe both versions should have much the same support
from 3rd party as well as from Impulse.

Doug Rudd
[e-mail]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Amiga Guide to the Galaxy refers to Commodore's management as
"A bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first to be lined up
against the wall and shot when the revolution comes."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They will get my Amiga from me when the pry it from my cold, dead hands.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------



+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #237 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: Mirror-Extrudes
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 1994 17:24:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Curcio Nicholas <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 3 Oct 1994, Jason B Koszarsky wrote:

>
> I'm working with Imagine3.0(Amiga) and have problems with Mirroring
> the ends for extrusions.  If I use a half sphere, then it works fine.
> But I've had no luck with custom objects.
> My custom objects will extrude but the ends won't mirror.
>
> Jaeson K.

I had this exact problem just recently.  Two days ago to be exact. ;)
To what length are you attempting to extrude the object?  I was trying
to extrude half of a Mech leg 15 units.  Didn't work.  I accidently tried
100 units (the default) and it worked perfectly.  Then I just picked all
the points on one side and translated them 85 units back.  I haven't
had time to experiment with the problem, yet.  Just happy that I got
it to work by accident. :)

Later,

Nick





+---> ARCHIVE MESSAGE NUMBER #238 ***************************************:-)

Subject: Re: banner object
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 1994 09:06:40 -0600 (MDT)
From: Douglas Rudd <[e-mail]>

> a banner tacked to a wall with the center sagging down.  i have tried a box
> object, subdivide multiple times, and then deform but its not quite right.
> any other ideas?
>
I havn't actually tried this, but it seems than a good gray scale bit map of
your banner "Appliqued" to a high point count plane may do the trick. It
would take a lot of ram and slow things down a bit. You might also try a clip
and altitude map set on a simple plane. I agree that clip maps take a little
more work, but anyone who has seen what Snap Maps can do should agree it's
worth the effort.


Doug Rudd
[e-mail]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Amiga Guide to the Galaxy refers to Commodore's management as
"A bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first to be lined up
against the wall and shot when the revolution comes."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They will get my Amiga from me when the pry it from my cold, dead hands.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------