Amiga Tools 3/Amiga Tools 3.iso/grafik/raytracing/imagine/tips/arc13.txt

Text File | 1993-03-12 | 120.6 KB | 3,039 lines

IMAGINE archive: collected off of [e-mail]

ARCHIVE XIII
Oct. 6 '91 - Oct. 16 '91

If you have questions or problems with this file, email Marvin Landis
at [e-mail]

note: each message seperated by a '##'

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Subject: Re: Solid Cube?
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 91 13:47:38 PDT
From: Daryl T. Bartley <[e-mail]>

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you DO get a 'solid cube' by extruding a plane.
Shouldn't it work just like any other faced object that gets extruded? It fills
in the sides. Or you could add a primitive tube with 4 points and close the top
and bottom. Maybe I don't know what you mean by solid.


Daryl Bartley
[e-mail]
Survivor: AnimeCon '91 staff
'Thank you for your hard cooperation'


##

Subject: Re: Solid Cube?
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 91 16:10:03 -0600
From: HURTT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL <[e-mail]>

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but you DO get a 'solid cube' by extruding a
    plane. Shouldn't it work just like any other faced object that gets
    extruded? It fills in the sides. Or you could add a primitive tube
    with 4 points and close the top and bottom. Maybe I don't know what you
    mean by solid.


    Daryl Bartley
    [e-mail]
    Survivor: AnimeCon '91 staff
    'Thank you for your hard cooperation'

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

    Not really. Not a true 'solid' as in having the inside filled. A plane
that has been extruded is really only a empty box. I think I've found a solution
to my problem though, but it doesn't involve an actual 'solid'. Look for a new
pic on hubcap in a few days.

    And thanks to everyone for the help!

    Chris


##

Subject: Re: Solid Cube?
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 91 10:07:25 EDT
From: Mark Thompson <[e-mail]>

Chris Hurtt writes:
>     How does one actaully make a cube that is solid? I had thought by
> just extruding a plane I would get a "solid" cube, but in fact it is hollow.

Imagine as well as every other Amiga 3D package I am aware of is based on
3D surfaces and they have no concept of volume. You can subdivide your
cube into increasingly smaller cubes, but no matter what you do, you will
still always be working with surfaces and not volumes. Volumetric rendering
which is popular in the scientific visualization realm uses a 3D unit
called a voxel which is sort of the 3D equivalent to pixels. Theses tiny
solid cubes actually occupy volume rather than just represent surfaces
and are the fundemental building block in volumetric rendering. Quite
often, these voxels are given some degree of transparency so that interior
voxels can be seen beneath the surface of the exterior ones (quite common
in medical imaging). While you can make attempts at emulating the appearance
of voxel based solids in Imagine, it will still always be a hollow surface
and behave as such. So the question then arises, what are you trying to
achieve by having a solid cube?
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
|      `       '        Mark Thompson                 CONCURRENT COMPUTER  |
| --==* RADIANT *==--   [e-mail]        Principal Graphics   |
|      ' Image `        ...!uunet!masscomp!mark       Hardware Architect   |
|     Productions       [phone] [phone]   & General Nuisance   |
|                                                                          |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

##

Subject: Re: Solid Cube?
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 91 15:56:13 MDT
From: [e-mail] (Brian Ridout)


Chris Hurtt writes:
>     How does one actaully make a cube that is solid? I had thought by
> just extruding a plane I would get a "solid" cube, but in fact it is hollow.

I was wondering somthing similar.  I tried to do a glass of water with a
stiring stick.  I wanted to see the refraction like I do in a real glass of
water.  I found that if I made a thick  glass that the light refracted around
the glass and therefore it was black.  I finally simulated the effect by making
the glass a single thickness but made a lop at the top.  the water was a smaller
diameter to make the thickness of the glass.  The picture looks good but it
still does not look like the reall glass of water I compaired it to.   oh well.


I think I understand how the program views refraction.  I assume the ray starts
off in air (index of 1) and when it hits a surface it does the calculation with
the index of the surface.  Then assumes it is back in air again.  I.E. an
infinitely thin object, plane, whatever.

Right?

Brian Ridout


##

Subject: Re: Solid Cube?
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 91 18:07:49 CDT
From: Wayne Haufler 283-4160 <[e-mail]>

Brian Ridout ([e-mail]) writes:
...
> I think I understand how the program views refraction.  I assume the
> ray starts off in air  (index of 1) and when it hits a surface it does
> the calculation with the index of the surface.  Then assumes it is back
> in air again.  I.E. an infinitely thin object, plane, whatever.
>
> Right?

Well, from my limited understanding of physics, refraction only matters
at surface boundaries between materials or media, anyway.  Since light
bends at the boundaries between glass and air, air and water, water and
glass, or whatever, volumetric representation is (or probably shouldn't
be) necessary to model light refracting through various materials.

Though you may be right in that the index of refraction of a material
itself  (if I remember right) assumes that the material outside of the
object is air.  So the idea is to model MATERIAL BOUNDARIES, not the
materials themselves.  So how would you model the boundary between
glass and water?  Perhaps with a cylindrical surface, inside of the
glass, with the index set to the difference between glass and water
index of refractions, or the glass-to-water index calculated in some way.

It has been too long since College Physics and I have not played much
with this aspect of Imagine.  Can anyone else verify these ideas?
Thanks.


         __         Wayne A. Haufler   [Christian/SW Engineer/XLib'er/Amigan]
\\ /\\ /\\ //_       [e-mail]          MDSSC - Houston
 \/--\// \//__       Hobby:"Exploring the Use of Computer Graphics and
     //                     Animations To Support Christian Endeavors"

##

Subject: AmiExpo Oakland Report
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 91 15:36:34 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Worley)

Well, I spent the weekend (and a day off from work on Friday)
attending AmiExpo in Oakland. Great fun! I met several members of the
list, like Todd Landry, Mike Simpson, and Evara Ligue (sorry if I
mangled your name!).  I got a chance to talk lot of well known
Amigans, like Perry Kivolowicz from ASDG, Steve Gillmor of Impulse,
Joel Hagen, Harv Laser, Bill Seymor, Joel Hagen, Mike Smythwick, and
more that I forget. And I met Allen Hastings and Jay Miner (both
locals) there as well.

Anyway, I want to talk about some of the stuff I saw- this is all with
a graphics bent, so forgive me if I ignore Dr. T's super-dooper music
things or the new MicroProse games.

First, the big toys that everyone was flashing was the new graphics
boards.  There are a lot! I carried a pocketful of floppies with
IFF24s and had them displayed on the different boards to compare
quality- this was a great idea, because some of the vendors had really
stacked the deck with the type of images they were showing. A brief
rundown of the boards that were being shown:


The GVP IV24.  768 by 482 DEINTERLACED 24 bit.  Very nice, especially
the PIP.  They had a lot of Lou Markoya's stuff being shown on a 1950
monitor.  The deinterlacing was not very apparent for any of the
images (24 bit tends to have smooth gradients, hence no flicker) but
I'm sure if you were using it as a 24 bit text display it would really
show it's power. They had a camera and were doing screen grabs and
showing the picture-in-picture. A lot of fun.

The Colorburst. Finally saw one! There are big rumors about MAST
having to drop the product because the designer was miffed about the
software. I asked, and the guy demoing CB didn't say anything. I mean,
he just looked at me, and then turned away. Geez! They were selling at
the Creative Computers mini-mall for $700, I think. The quality of a
displayed IFF24 was excellent! But the software they were showing was
really hokey. There IS a paint program, but it didn't have a very good
feel and didn't respond smoothly. Big bummer. 768 by 482 24 bit.

The Rembrandt. Progressive was showing their pre-production model, and
fishing for developers. 1K by 1K 24 bit, with a 2K by 2K memory
buffer. On-card 34020 coprocessor at (40?) Mhz, and (something)82 math
coprocessor. The boards display was slick, but not as lively as any of
the other boards- it might have been the monitor, but the images were
dim with too little contrast. Anyway, this board's coprocessor can
render and do math computations in parallel with the Amiga- a demo
showed a mandelbrot set being rendered real time with the A3000's
68040 (!), then with the board's processor. It was a tie. With more
coprocessors, (up to 4), the board would speed up it's calculation
that much more. Pretty slick! The cool part was blitting around a 320
by 200 sub-image at 30fps- not too shabby! Another fun trick was
running an anim with the 040 at full speed, while simultaneously
rendering stuff on the Rembrandt. Anyway, they are working on a paint
program and other software, but in 6 months this could be The Thing.
List is 4K.  Ouch.

Firecracker 24. Impulse wasn't there, but many people were using them.
1K by 482 resolution, 24 bit. The Virtual Reality Labs were showing
the new verson of Vista Pro (amazing!) with these boards, and there
were startled gasps of amazement as people walked by. These images and
the output were just beautiful! Perry Kivolowicz also used one for a
talk on using the Amiga as an imaging workstation, and it was pretty
slick.  (it went through a genlock and out to a video projector). He
even used ADPro to drive it. :-) Anyway, the quality is very
comperable to Colorbursts- very clean colors, a bright and lively
feel. The FC24 is sharper, though, which gives it a really nice edge
for raytraces. For scanned images, you might not be able to tell. The
FC24 paintbox is functional, and real-time, but not as nice as the
DCTV paintbox. One COOL feature of the FC24 paint (Light 24) is the
ability to LOAD IMAGINE OBJECTS AND RENDER THEM DIRECTLY ONTO AN
IMAGE. This is GREAT fun! You load an object, and manipulate its
orientation, size, and position on the image. (in wireframe). Then you
punch a button, and it renders a scanline version of the object (with
world reflection mapping) Also, there is nice Firecracker support in
ADPro, though I bet the newest version of ADPro will support many of
the others. Street price of the FC24 is something like $860.

Digital Creations had a very popular booth, showing off DCTV. I bought
one, finally! [There goes the piggy bank.] The DCTV outputs composite
video- it's not 24 bit. But the output is terrific! It can't compete
with the sharpness of any of the 24 bit boards, but I preferred the
image quality to a lot of the stuff being shown on the Rembrandt. The
neat part is you can animate the DCTV at whatever speed you can
animate hires, typically 10 fps, faster if you take a cut in image
quality. The paint program is top notch. They were showing off the new
version of the software, (1.1??)  with undo, and a few more features.
[sorry, I don't know exactly].  They will ship the software in a few
weeks, $15 upgrade for current DCTV owners. I also made them promise
they would make a DCTV loader for their DCTV.library, and to make sure
ASDG got it. (they only had a saver, before). Cost is $400, street.

Fun anecdote setting up my DCTV, it turns out my CABLE TV had AC power
coming in on it's grounded shield (!!!!) , and my VCR and TV had been
operating on this signal for months by floating over the supposedly
constant ground. I never knew this until I was about to hook up my
grounded DCTV/A3000 to my VCR, and ZZZAAAPP..  right though my body.
Yow! No damage (to me or the hardware), but I plan to really nail the
cable company. I want to get a junk VCR and melt the inside with a
blowtorch just to see the cable guy's reactions... I have NO IDEA how or
why it's like that and I'm just surprised my TV and VCR actually worked.

Newtek was there and showed off the Toaster. Of course. More later,
epecially on the new Toaster 2.0 release this month. The Toaster
framebuffer is 24 bit internally, but it has NTSC composite output.
This decreases the sharpness considerably, but if you're going to
video anyway, it's really good. (though not as good as the IV24 with
S-video AND RGB out).  Still, the Colorburst, FC24, Rembrandt and IV24
all beat the toaster output for sharpness and quality. Interestingly
enough, many times it is REALLY tough to tell a DCTV from a Toaster
display.

Last board I saw was the Digital Micronics 8 bit board. This board
also has a 34020 coprocessor like the Rembrandt. The output is 1280 by
1024, 8 bit, and is pretty slick. Many detailed images were stunning,
but it started to lose when I asked them to display some very colorful
images. (it only has 256 colors..) It's really meant for UNIX and
hi-res text, and performs admirably in this manner. Another company
was using the board for it's Postscript-output presentation software,
and the quality was terrific. This board isn't really meant as much
for images as the 24 bit boards, but it is a great pinch-hitter. Price
is >$1,000, I don't know exactly.

I never got a chance to see HAM-E. Black Belt was not at the show, and
nobody was using one. Oh well.

Well, that's it for display hardware. If I was asked to recommend one,
I would say first get a DCTV ($400). It has animation support, a
decent price, and great software. If you wanted great quality, go for
the Firecracker 24. It's quality is stunning, and the price is
reasonable. Colorburst is a good option for 500 and 1000 owners who
can't use the plug in FC24, but the extra price of the FC24 ($860 vs
$700) is well worth the investment. If you can afford both the DCTV
and the FC24, you have a dream setup. This is all IMHO. :-)

Please, no flames, especially about the Toaster output quality. It is
excellent, but not sharp! Still, if/when a 3000 version comes out, I'll
probably get one.

Going on, there were four companies showing 040 boards, two for the
3000.  The progressive A3000 040 board was $1600, and was marginally
(5%) faster than the GVP 040 board. ( Don't know the cost of the GVP).
I didn't compare 2000 versions, but the Mega-Midget-Racer guys were
showing them off, though I'm not sure if they were selling. (GVP
wasn't, Progressive was. I even held Perry Kivolowitz's A3000
accelerator from Progressive, being careful not to drool directly on
the packaging.) The Fusion-40 from RCS (A2000 only) was also being
demoed and sold.

More 3D.

Real-3D had a booth and was pushing their program. They had the latest
Amigaworld open to the Impulse Imagine ad, and were comparing those
images to versions done in Real-3D. The images they showed were pretty
slick, but the salesman didn't want to give me a hands-on demo of the
modeller and such- he just wanted to show the pictures. Considering
they have a demo version of the software out on the BBSs and FTP site,
my guess is that the guy I talked to just didn't know how to use it.
The boolean operations do look keen, though, but they need some help
with their textures and modelling. Also, tinted glass and non-white
mirrors would be fun.

YANRT. Yet another new ray tracer was announced at the Expo, this
one a low-end $100 script-based ray tracer called RayDance, from
Radiance Software. [Nothing to do with Mark Thompson!]
 Some VERY interesting features like brush maps that follow morphing
objects. [Where have I heard that before?] I'll type in the press
release sometime this week. Release is sometime this month. It
probably won't be immediate competion in the Lightwave/Imagine battle,
but it might fill a low-end niche. [First impression, I sure could be
wrong]

The big 3D support software this year seems to be packages of
digitized surfaces like brick and wood. Two companies were selling
these at the Expo, Texture City, and MicroSearch (the ChromaKey guys).
I'll post some images using the Microsearch textures and write more
about them later when I get a chance to play with them more, but they
were great! They have three texture volumes: Stone, Tiles, and Wood,
selling for $50 a pop, $30 on the street. The president of Microsearch
told me that he would make one image on each package freely
distributable- I'll upload them. Anyway, they are great packages, and
worth the money. Nicolas Alwin made some great Imagine renderings with
them.

The other set of images was from Texture City. This is a really
professional package, and they were trying to sell to the high-end
video buffs as backgrounds for titles and framestores as well as to the
3D rendering crowd. They had an incredible selection of textures,
something like 200 images!! The quality of the images they showed was
impeccable. But the cost was absolutely outrageous: they wanted $350
for 40 images (I'll check on the exact number, but roughly 40).
Ouch!!! I couldn't reccomend these to the casual user unless you had a
lot of cash or absolutely needed top quality. For that kind of money
you could buy a scanner of your own.

I met Victor Osaka of the Turbo SIG (a paper 3D newsletter), and
talked to him for a while. He was working in the Texture City booth,
and was selling copies of his newsletter. He wasn't overly interested
in talking about rendering, though, and looked more like he just
wanted to get out of the Expo and go home. By Sunday, most dealers
were like that. :-)

Sunrize was showing off it's new sound boards- a 12 bit mono
sampler/playback board and the stereo 16 bit version. These things
were great, especially the 12 bit! The quality is VASTLY superior to 8
bit, and Sunrize is trying to sell them for video sound editing. They
are perfect for this- and they're cheap! (on the order of $450). They
even have SMPTE time code for syncing everything, and some decent
support software. (much like Audiomaster) The 16 bit sampler was
great, too, but > 1K in price.

Axiom (?) software was showing off the newest version of Pixel 3D 2.0.
This version now includes object conversion, BEVELING OF EXTRUSIONS,
and some really fun other tools like intensity->height mapping. I
picked up a copy, I'll post a long description and mini-review of it
as soon as I have a chance to play with it. It was selling for $70
street price. First impression: Interchange is a dead product unless
their new version is absolutely top-notch.

Some of the seminars were interesting. Steve Gillmor showed off his
pet product, Foundation, on a multimedia panel. Perry Kivolowicz did
NOT show off ADPro 2.0, much to my disappointment. (JPEG will save us
from out 24 bit storage problems!) I sat next to Kiki Stockhammer for
the Toaster 2.0 keynote, and has to endure the most vile perfume for
an hour and a half....

At the Toaster 2.0 unveiling, they showed most of the new features.
(the 2.0 is a software, NOT a hardware update. $100 sometime this
month) Genlock control from workbench and two new panels of
transitions were the big additions to the main software. The Toaster
framestore is now compressed for faster loading. [I always thought it
was stored UNcompressed for faster loading!]

Lightwave 2.0 has a slew of new features, though, and Allen Hastings
took most of the keynote time to show them off.

Most of the Lightwave features have been added to it's modeller. Here
is a list, from memory, that covers most of them. [I know I'll miss
quite a few, both because he never talked about them and because I've
forgotten.

 Skinning between cross-sections
 Magnetism point-dragging
 Twist, shear, scaling, bending of objects or points of objects
    [bending was really cool]
 Ability to load attributes from a library on disk
 Cylindrical and spherical bump (altitude) mapping
 A better file requestor (with a parent button)

 In the layout/renderer:

 A couple of new textures, including "underwater"
 New shadings for moons/planets/etc [Mark Thompson told us about this]
 Morphing now allows multiple morph targets, so an object could go from
    version 1 to version 2 to version 3 of an object.
 More control of the envelope splines, allowing kinks and control of
    overshoots
 Faster rendering overall.
 Super-lo-res for quick rendering (1/2 lores?) and one super-hi-res
   (2K by 1K????) for magazine covers, etc.

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

That's my quick report on the show.  Anyway, more later on the FC24,
Pixel 3D, and the Microsearch textures.


-Steve

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Worley                                       [e-mail]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

##

Subject: Re: Solid Cube?
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 91 18:23:01 CDT
From: Wayne Haufler 283-4160 <[e-mail]>

I wrote:
>    Well, from my limited understanding of physics, refraction only matters
>    at surface boundaries between materials or media, anyway.  Since light
>    bends at the boundaries between glass and air, air and water, water and
>    glass, or whatever, volumetric representation is (or probably shouldn't
                            ^ NOT
>    be) necessary to model light refracting through various materials.

OOPS!  Note correction above.

         Wayne A. Haufler


##

Subject: Re: Solid Cube?
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 91 20:47:13 -0600
From: HURTT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL <[e-mail]>

    Well, from my limited understanding of physics, refraction only matters
    at surface boundaries between materials or media, anyway.  Since light
    bends at the boundaries between glass and air, air and water, water and
    glass, or whatever, volumetric representation is (or probably shouldn't
    be) necessary to model light refracting through various materials.

    Though you may be right in that the index of refraction of a material
    itself  (if I remember right) assumes that the material outside of the
    object is air.  So the idea is to model MATERIAL BOUNDARIES, not the
    materials themselves.  So how would you model the boundary between
    glass and water?  Perhaps with a cylindrical surface, inside of the
    glass, with the index set to the difference between glass and water
    index of refractions, or the glass-to-water index calculated in some
    way.

    It has been too long since College Physics and I have not played much
    with this aspect of Imagine.  Can anyone else verify these ideas?
    Thanks.
    ----------------

    Hey Wayne,
    This all sounds well & good too me. Indeed light only bends at the
boundries of two different media. I have been wondering how to get a bottle of
water to actually look like one. I did a trace of 3 bottles, one with nothing
in it, just the glass bottle, another with the glass bottle & a perfectly
fitting cylinder of water inside it, and one that had the inner cylinder
made of glass, instead of water. I could post the picture if there is
interest to hubcap for you to see for yourselfs. The conclusion has been
though that the glass within glass looked the best.
    I'll have to try out your idea of making the water the difference
between glass & water --> .34

    Chris


##

Subject: Square Checks!
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 91 21:16:19 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Linton)

Is there anyway to get the check texture to actually make square checks on a
spherical shape?  I'm tring to get the checks to go around a 'bullet shape'.
Any help would be appreciated.

                  Thanks.


--- (Michael Linton) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
E-mail: [e-mail]
system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

##

Subject: Textures
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 91 4:11:46 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Aaron Tucker)

    GUESS WHAT? I have good news and I have bad news. The good news
is that I have found a ton of textures. The bad news is that they are in
no format that I can recognize.

    The ftp address:  128.163.128.6
    Directory: Textures
    Subdirectories: Tape1, Tape2, and Tape3

SOMEONE! Please convert them to 24bit IFF. If I had to hazard a guess as to
the remotely possible file type and bitplanes...I would say the MAC PICT
format in 2 colors, according to Rasterlink..the only file type it did not
choke on. Well, there you have it. Programmers ahead!


Juan Trevino
[e-mail]

O KEY DOUGH KEY?


##

Subject: coke bottles
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 91 11:49:00 GMT-0500
From: Scott Matthew Krehbiel <[e-mail]>

Have you tried making the bottle with an inner surface?  I don't know
if it's possible to make an object with a negative refraction value, but
if you had a solid coke bottle with a pocket of air inside, you'd need
to give the air a negative refraction value to compensate for the
change of media.  Correct me if I'm wrong  on this.

A different approach would be to make the air pocket inside out, so
that as the light enters the pocket, it thinks it's leaving.  Is
this possible?

I guess the most reliable approach, though the most tedious, would be to
create the bottle with an inner surface ( spin a curved 'U' shape around
a distant point ) and then create the inside shape to exactly fit.  Then
the light would get the effect of leaving the glass before entering the
air/water/diamond/whatever pocket.

by the way, the reason for the inside out shape, that I mentioned earlier,
would be to have the refraction value be the difference between the glass
and water, or whatever.

just a couple suggestions from a 68000 user who'd like to see the results
before next year...

[e-mail]

##

Subject: Re:  Square Checks!
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 91 13:35:36 -0600
From: HURTT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL <[e-mail]>

    Is there anyway to get the check texture to actually make square checks
    on a spherical shape?  I'm tring to get the checks to go around a
    'bullet shape'.  Any help would be appreciated.

                      Thanks.


-----------------------------------
       If I understand you correctly what you might want to do is a wrap instead
of a texture. Not sure how well it will tuck the corners with checks though.

    Chris

##

Subject: Re: AmiExpo Oakland Report
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 91 16:41:35 EDT
From: Mark Thompson <[e-mail]>

Steve Worley writes:
> Axiom (?) software was showing off the newest version of Pixel 3D 2.0.
> First impression: Interchange is a dead product unless
> their new version is absolutely top-notch.

Steve or anyone using Pixel 3D 2.0, I haven't received my 2.0 update yet
so I was wondering how the object conversion in Pixel 3D 2.0 compared to
InterChange. Does it do as good of job and if so, what makes it better.
I am definately looking forward to the Beveling feature!

Side note, rev 2 of my objects converted from LightWave to Imagine are
now on hubcap (have been for several days).

> Lightwave 2.0 has a slew of new features.
> Most of the Lightwave features have been added to it's modeller. Here
> is a list, from memory, that covers most of them. [I know I'll miss
> quite a few, both because he never talked about them and because I've
> forgotten.

The new features list would cover many pages at this point but the very latest
ones that Steve didn't mention is the addition of spline curves in the modeler.
%~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~%
%      `       '        Mark Thompson                 CONCURRENT COMPUTER  %
% --==* RADIANT *==--   [e-mail]        Principal Graphics   %
%      ' Image `        ...!uunet!masscomp!mark       Hardware Architect   %
%     Productions       [phone] [phone]   & General Nuisance   %
%                                                                          %
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

##

Subject: Another Fun Project
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 91 15:25:34 -0600
From: HURTT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL <[e-mail]>

    Ok folks, as we all know Halloween is coming up and here is a fun
little animation project you might consider doing! This idea comes from back
when I had my Vic 20 with (wow!) a Super Expander! (8K and awesome graphics :)
There was a program in I think Power Play that I typed in. What it did was
draw a jacko-latern on your screen and have it leviate around with a few
lightning flashes evrey now and then. I put this in my window Halloween instead
of the traditionally messy (but also fun) pumpkin. It was a hit.
    So I though, hey! What a perfect project for Imagine with it's powerful
slice ability! To make your own there's basically two approaches depending on
your RAM situation.
    Get in the forms editor. Make a new form with 30 points, 15 slices, a
most important a X-Y Cross section. Now goto the top view and drag every 3rd
point back towards the center a little bit. Make 'em varied in depth and
direction for a not so perfect looking pumpkin
    You should now have 20 'wedges' around the pumpkin. They'll be fairly
blockish looking, but don't worry, Phong will come to the rescue. If this doesnt
sound right, then you probably mis-understood 'drag every 3rd point'.
    Seal up the top and bottom of your pumpkin in either the front or right
view by having the top two and bottom two points snapped to the nearest
vertex with a grid of spacing 100. I think you know what I mean, if it doesn't
sound that clear to you.
    Save your very nice, but fairly complex pumpkin. Find by requestor says
900 points, 2580 edges, 1680 faces, so you might try making less points & slices
when you start your form.
    Now you'd think it's just a simple process now of loading it up in the
detail editor and slicing out your jacko-latern's features. Not so, this is
the source of my recent questions about true solids in Imagine. If you punch
out some eyes & a mouth now, your pumpkin will look like it's made out of paper.
The actual walls of the pumpkin are only an edge thick & thus look strange when
rendered, the pumpkin is only a shell.
    I had though I could simply drop the pumpkin in a box, slice it. Drop a
smaller scaled original pumpkin inside the now solid pumpkin and thereby make
a pumpkin with thickness. Not so! But never fear, a recent SAGA meeting provided
me a solution from the great Imagineers Ed Chadez & Don Witaker. Thanks guys!
    To give the illusion of thickness to your Pumpkin heres what you need
to do. Note: this will add even more complexity to your pumpkin so if you
are low on RAM you might want to just live with a 'thin' jackolatern. Make a
copy of your pumpkin and paste it in the same area (imagine will do this auto
matically). Then slighty scale one of the pumpkins down, the smaller the thicker
your pumpkin. At this point your might want to set the attributes on your
pumpkin since you'll need to join the two pieces and the inside of a pumpkin
tends to be a much lighter orange than the outside. Here's what I used:

    Color 201 128 0 Reflect, Filter, Specular 31 8 0, Dithering 255
    Hardness 218, Roughness 0, Shininess 0

    With the inside being the same except the Color 241 168 91 and
    Specular 0 0 0

    Of course, feel free to alter these as you like. If you plan on only
doing a still than throw in a Roughness of about 11. Note: don't use roughness
if you plan to animate your pumpkin unless you want the well document 'crawling
ants' effect! Use a bump map on your outer portion of the pumpkin, a light spray
of different grays on white with DPaint should do the trick. Read Steve Worley's
excellent tutorials for more info on maps in general.

    Now that you've set up the to portions of the pumpkin, join 'em
together. You should have a horendously complex object now.
    Finally we are ready for slicing! Make your eyes, nose, mouth whatever
in whatever way you feel. Once again if you've got the RAM draw something
fairly grimicing in Dpaint and import it with either Pixel 3-D or Imagines own.
Having it filles with faces is not important. Extrude your eye for example and
place it where you want on the pumpkin. Make sure that your extruded eye only
goes out one side, unless that is the effect you want. Nothing worse than a
two-faced jack-o-latern. Slice the pumpkin and the eye. After an amazing amount
of time ungroup your parts. Be sure to discard the right pieces! What you
want to save is of course the pumpkin, and the 'wall' that has been made
between your eye hole and the inner & outer shells of the pumpkin. This will
give you that thickness we've been after through all this!
    Also, note your two inner & outer 'shells' we now be apart and we have
to be rejoined for the other eye, mouth, etc. Plus don't forget to join the
new 'wall' around the eye hole to your whole pumpkin.

    As you will see, this makes for a very complex and large object given
what little you are really doing. If you are low on RAM these are my
suggestions.
    Make the original form with less pts & slices.
    Don't use a bump map at all with your pumpkin. Just let it be smooth.
    Don't have a inner and outer wall for 'thickness'. Settle for a thin
        pumpkin.
    Don't add other frills like a color map with color imperfections &
    gashes that pumpkins have. Just a simple stalk, or none at all.
    Make your eyes, mouth, etc, simple shapes like a traditional pumpkin.

    Also, you might consider only rendering in scanline. I have a 68000,
and have been using only scanline and feel the output is good enough for my
needs.

    Please excuse any errors in this. I may have the attributes part messed
up, I'm not sure. To be sure, reset everything before you do you last joining
after your last slicing. I think I had my mouth set to white from Pixel 3-D
and thus had white faces around where I had sliced into the pumpkin.
    Also, squash & stretch your pumpkin around when you are done. Who wants
a perfect sphere for a pumpkin? For those of you who want to get right to the
slashing & hacking I'll upload 2 pumpkins to hubcap. One will be have less pts
than the other in it. I'm not sure how much of a problem RAM will be though,
I have 3 megs, and have only ran out when trying to slice very complex eyes
into the 2 layered pumpkin....

    Happy rendering everyone! ps- if anyone has a good idea for a candle
flame let me know!

    Chris

pss- I may also try this out in Real 3-D, let you all know it goes...

{       Chris Hurtt        | Computer Science |        This Space          }
{ [e-mail] |  Applications in |         For Rent           }
{   [e-mail]   |  Fine Arts Major |      (303)-466-9259        }
{  !kessener!burner!churtt |   CU - Boulder   |          PEACE!            }


##

Subject: Re: Textures
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 91 19:36:31 EDT
From: Mark Thompson <[e-mail]>

> I have found a ton of textures. The bad news is that they are in
> no format that I can recognize.

The reason you could not recognize their format was because they are in
no standard format. They are raw 8bit greymaps some organized as 512x512
and others are 1024x1024. You can convert them to the pbmplus PGM format by
simply attaching a couple lines to the top of the file as in:

P5
512 512
255

for the 512x512 images and

P5
1024 1024
255

for the 1024 1024 images.
You can then view them with xv or convert them to something else with
pbmplus. I took a look at the first four in the Tape1 directory and they
appear to be scanned right out of the "Textures" book I mentioned a
few months back. The first four were grass, tree bark, straw, and cloth.
Have fun.
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
|      `       '        Mark Thompson                 CONCURRENT COMPUTER  |
| --==* RADIANT *==--   [e-mail]        Principal Graphics   |
|      ' Image `        ...!uunet!masscomp!mark       Hardware Architect   |
|     Productions       [phone] [phone]   & General Nuisance   |
|                                                                          |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

##

Subject: Re: Square Checks!
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 91 19:24:08 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Linton)

[e-mail] (Edward Chadez) writes:

> Michael,
>
> The textures don't really work well with spherical objects...from my use
> of them.
>
> However, you CAN build your own IFF-MAP texture and wrap it around the
> object.  It would be nice to be able to preform the same stunt with
> textures....
>
> Edward Chadez
>  -Amiga3000-
>
I usually use a checks brush that I draw in Dpaint.  I just wanted to know
if it was at all possible to do it with the checks.  Thanks.



--- (Michael Linton) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
E-mail: [e-mail]
system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

##

Subject: Sort Problem
Date: Tue,  8 Oct 91 18:41:24 PDT
From: [e-mail]

Well, I'm new to this mailing list first of all and now my problem.
I took a disk and took a 45 degree section of it for the corner of some
2d object.  I have just the edges and I add 2 lines and flip the disk to
create a bottom edge.  (I'm making a path for an E without the middle bar).
Now, I select all the points in order (I knew that from Silver) and selected
SORT.  So I take another disk and extrude it along that path.  Well, it looks
like I didn't sort it at all!  So I call Portal (that's what I'm using now BTW
and go to the Impulse help area, if thats what you want to call it, and Steve
Worley suggested that I try it with sorting the edges.  That changed it a l
but it starts at the 2nd point and goes on for a few points just fine and then
CHAOS!  I read the manual and had no luck.  So I figure now that I belong to
this why not try it out!  HELP!  I also have a few other problems, which I
will be asking when I get some time to type them in.  One major one is 24 bit
brushes, they simply just come out with what seems to be a random palette! No
matter how small or big.  Steve Worley also gave me a few suggestions on this
one too.  And also global reflectance maps don't work at all!!  And also I get
some weird freeze ups of the whole system on mouse clicks once in a while.
I've tryed everything!!  I have an A500, 68000, KS 1.2, 512K Agnus, 3 megs tot
Hard Drive.  I've even tried booting from a simple WB disk!  I really need the
24 bit maps to work!!  And that freezing up is really anoying.

##

Subject: Error on Fun Project
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 91 22:09:27 -0600
From: HURTT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL <[e-mail]>

    I may have messed up the inital settings for the form. Here it is
again in case I did:

    # of Points    60
    # of Slices    15
    X-Y Cross Section

    Indeed, I think I did. Sorry!

    Chris
    [e-mail]

##

Subject: Re: Solid Cube?
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 91 09:38:07 EDT
From: Mark Thompson <[e-mail]>

HURTT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL writes:
>     With a solid cube I was hoping to be able to drop things inside of it
> and do a Slice. Then I'd have a mold of it, plus a slightly smaller 'solid'
> copy.

No problem, just create a half cube with the 'inside' surface fully
tesselated with polygons (for good slice detail) and slice half your object
into it. If it is symetrical, create a mirror duplicate for the other half
of the mold. Otherwise, repeat with the other half of the object. Finally,
shink the original object slightly to fit into the 'mold' halves snuggly.
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
|      `       '        Mark Thompson                 CONCURRENT COMPUTER  |
| --==* RADIANT *==--   [e-mail]        Principal Graphics   |
|      ' Image `        ...!uunet!masscomp!mark       Hardware Architect   |
|     Productions       [phone] [phone]   & General Nuisance   |
|                                                                          |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

##

Subject: lowres animation
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 91 13:05:29 EST
From: [e-mail] (Ramin Taraz)

I was trying to make a little animation using lowres in scanline mode.
I had only 8 frames.
so I selected them all and pushed generate.  everything went fine, of course
then when I pushed make(movie) and imagine made the movie for me.

the problem is that the palette for each frame is different.  So when you
run the animfile, using DP4, the colors keep changing.  How do you
tell imagine to use the same palette for all frames?

Does this problem happen in ham too?

[e-mail]

##

Subject: Re: Genlock objects
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 91 10:30:16 EDT
From: cbmtor![e-mail] (Caleb J. Howard (Tech Support))

>
> Maybe I don't understand you, but it sounds like you are attempting to
> composite a translucent object over genlocked video. First off, without
> an alpha channel, this cannot be done. Second, refracting a black background
> though a crystal object is a pointless operation. If both these points
> are obvious to you, then maybe you could better explain what you are trying
> to accomplish.

Hi there.  I knew these things, so I suppose I was not clear.  (Not too
suprizing given my state of mind at the time).  What I want to do is render
my crystal letters not with live video showing through.  As you say, that
requires an alpha channel.  I want a generic background of, say the Imagine
sky, or any other Imagine objects for that matter to show through the letters,
BUT NOT TO SHOW AROUND THEM.  This seems to me to be exactly what genlock
objects  should do.  I should be able to, say, define a green sky, turn on
the genlock sky attribute and have the sky refracted through the letters, but
NOT have the sky visible directly.  I should have crystal letters with green
sky showing through them on a black background.  A black background that I
may overlay live video onto.  I should, by this, be able to see my crystal
letters with green sky refracting through them on a live video background.
I fact, this is exactly what happens... UNTIL I render to a 24 bit image.
That is, when I test render to 320x200 HAM, it works exactly as I hoped it
would.  As soon as I switch my output to 24 bit (IFF or Imagine format), the
genlock sky (or any other genlock objects) lose their genlock attribute, and
are rendered normally.  Having experimented with this further, I find that the
genlock attribute of the 24 bit images appear correctly when I click on the
'show' button in the project screen.  When I do this, Imagine takes the 24 bit
image that it has rendered, and displays a HAM approximation on the Amiga
screen WITH THE GENLOCK ATTRIBUTE FUNCTIONING.  The same image, output to the
Firecracker, ignores the genlock attribute.  This seems to me to be the result
of some programmer's reasoning that genlock objects are not useful in the
context of 24 bit images.
Earlier postings of a similar nature suggest that Scanline rendering be used
but this yeilded no change for me.
Actually, I just want these crystal letters to:
a)   appear on a black background so that they may be genlocked.
b)   not be black showing through crystal on a black background

The other question that I had was this:  Is Imagine clever enough to use
colour zero ONLY for genlock objects, or will it use colour zero to render
a dark shadow (and thus negate its usefulness with a genlock).

Thank you.

While I have the limelight, I wish to add my thanks to Steve Worley for the
inception and maintenance of this newsletter.  I have been a member from the
beginning, and have found it an immense catalyst in my own shift from utter
neophyte to paid professional.  (yup!  I gotta job :-).  This would not have
been remotely possible were it not for this marvellous medium of communication,
and the willingness and vision of the members of this group who can see the
benefit of free discourse unhindered by such archaic notions as 'competitive
edge'.  Thank you Steve, and everybody.  This is great.
-caleb


##

Date: Tue, 1 Oct 91 15:42 CDT
From: cbnewsd!ihlpf![e-mail]

I've heard that NewTek has GIVEN (like for free) a Toaster/A2000 to the
graphic artist on ST:TNG!!! Supposedly he uses a MAac for some stuff, but
he said to keep an eye out for Toaster graphics on ST:TNG some time soon.


##

Subject: Toasters for all
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 91 12:35:07 EDT
From: [e-mail]

Allen Price writes:

>P.S. 60 more Toasters? That makes like 110, now? Perhaps Steve W. can
>sweet-talk NewTek into giving each member on this list one each. We deserve
>it, no? Besides, WE'D BE USING IT ON ITS' NATIVE CPU!!!!!!!!

Ha... I wouldn't mind sweet-talking NewTek for just one for myself!

-Steve

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Worley                                        [e-mail]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

##

Subject: Re: Genlock objects
Date:    Wed, 9 Oct 91 14:41 EDT
From: "Marc Rifkin" <[e-mail]>

In-Reply-To: cbmtor!caleb AT uunet.UU.NET -- Tue, 8 Oct 91 10:30:16 EDT

A suggestion to the proposed problem of the GENLOCK option not working in 24
bit mode: Color the objects with a brush or texture map of the sky you wish to
have, and render the image with a black sky (in the Global setting).

You could use the linear texture to make the necessary gradations or draw it
in DPaint, Light24 or even just render a sky with no objects and use the
resulting image as a brush.

On another issue, why would I have trouble mapping a brush of rocks and
features I drew in dpaint onto a mountanous terrain in Imagine?  The
brush will not appear no how I position or orient it.

Marc Rifkin
Integrative Technologies Lab, Penn State University
5F Mitchell Building, University Park, PA 16802
814-863-8062 or for you normal people, [e-mail]
"Hasta, la etc."

##

Subject: Re: Rooms Project??
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 91 19:19:40 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan Price)

Colin,

Your point well taken. When the idea first came about on the list, that
was the other option presented. I opted to get the project rolling after
much debate by going with the "you make your own room" method, because I
just couldn't imagine creating a floorplan that didn't accomodate all the
possible rooms that everyone may dream up. (Turkish baths, atriums,
green-houses, or whatever.) In fact, at one point, Steve W. said he would
make a go at the floorplan and then wrote back saying, "What should I
include in it?"! So why not just have everyone design their own room?
As I wrote in my proposal outline, I was more than willing to go to the
effort of "squeezing" things around to make everything fit.
(It's almost a relief that no one did submit anything, I've got a lot
of personal projects going on right now - but if things DO come about,
I'll still be ready.)

##

Subject: Imagine 2.0!
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 91 15:20:55 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Linton)

I just recived my first copy of the Imagine Gazzette.  And in it was some
rather interesting news about Imagine 2.0.  I don't know if anyone has posted
a message about this yet, but I say it anyway.  Impulse is making a new product
the name has not been chosen yet.  Basicly it is Imagine 2.0, it will be out
very soon, as they put it.  It will retail for $ 500.00!  It will come with
more power, and more capabilities and a VERY COMPREHENSIVE USERS GUIDE!  It
should be out around christmas.  The upgrade price has not yet been confired,
but it looks like the upgrade price will be around $ 100.00.  Also if you
are really into Imagine, they have t-shirts for $ 10.00, probably with that
title picture when you load up the program.


--- (Michael Linton) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
E-mail: [e-mail]
system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

##

Subject: Re:  Imagine 2.0!
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 91 17:50:05 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Action Jackson)

> but it looks like the upgrade price will be around $ 100.00.  Also if you
> are really into Imagine, they have t-shirts for $ 10.00, probably with that
> title picture when you load up the program.

Yuck!  No thanks!  I cringe everytime I load up Imagine and that horrible
title picture shows up...  I hope the next software release will not have
that!!

-JC-

##

Subject: Re: AmiExpo Oakland Report
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 91 17:51:32 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Action Jackson)

Mark Thompson writes:
> Steve or anyone using Pixel 3D 2.0, I haven't received my 2.0 update yet
> so I was wondering how the object conversion in Pixel 3D 2.0 compared to
> InterChange. Does it do as good of job and if so, what makes it better.
> I am definately looking forward to the Beveling feature!

I'm not up to date with Interchange, but if Interchange still uses those
modules thingy's I'd say Pixel 3D 2.0 blows Interchange away..  for the
time being...that is...  The interface is hot...  just like LW's layout
editor...  but with added solid color/shading and hidden line wireframe.

It does auto-triangle-reduction (any connected triangles sharing one plane
are polygonized) and auto-backface-culling (delete's polygons facing inside
resulting in 1/2 reduction in # of polygons).  This is a great tool for
Sculpt Modelers who uses LightWave for shading.  I bought the package right
away after seeing this demonstrated.  It has a slew of other data reduction
tools that I haven't gotten a chance to try yet.

The software will save out to:
         LightWave         VideoScape
         Imagine           Sculpt 4D
         TurboSilver       3D Professional
         AutoCAD DXF
It will figure out what file format the object is and load it in...  tho
I've only tried LightWave, Sculpt4D, and AutoCAD...  Pixel didn't take in
the AutoCAD DXF file.  The loader doesn't recognize outlined objects w/ no
faces.  Oh wells Pixel 3D 2.0 has no editing features anyways.  If it did,
then they'll have to call it a modeler!

The beveling works well but it only works with the bitmap autotracer.  That
is, you set the beveling inset and depth and it will bevel after it
autotrace the image in.  It doesn't bevel existing outlined objects.  I'm
not too happy w/ with the way it autotrace bitmaps however..  I had a 250
pt.  size font in Dpaint and it did a poor job..  tracing the stair-stepped
pixels so that the font came out looking pixelly if you examine it up
close.  I'll stick to my friend's custom beveler which also duplicates the
bevel polygons so that LW doesn't phong-shade over the bevel as well as
work on outlined objects.

> The new features list would cover many pages at this point but the very latest
> ones that Steve didn't mention is the addition of spline curves in the modeler.

Is that spline curve like the "spine" effect in Hash's JourneyMan...  sure
looks like it!  I'm looking forward to the caustic underwater texture Allen
mentioned!

-JC-

##

Subject: Re:  1450
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 7:40:37 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Doug Dyer)

>
>   As I was away for the summer, I forgot how to post to the Imagine relay.
> Please give me the address. Also, I am unable to connect to the Hubcap site
> even though I am using the same address as last school semester. Has Hubcap
> been moved, or does it have more than one address? Thanks!
>
> David
>
130.127.8.1 is the actual address, and we don't have another address.
Try replying to this message to make sure there isnt just some node down
in the internet.  I don't know how smart the network layer is on the
internet,  that might be the reason.

p.s. for those that can't get an 'ls' I have been updating the
'files' file in the IMAGINE directory periodically.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug Dyer     *      Clemson University     *     [e-mail]
Quote 'O Fun: DOS is a bike without the seat.           skydive naked
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

##

Subject: linking ROOMS
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 13:30:44 BST
From: jerry cullingford <[e-mail]>

How's this for a fairly painless solution to joining the rooms together:

Someone create a corridor section. Long, with lots of standard doors
down one side, and distribute it to all the players:


    ---------------------------------------------------------------
..                              X                                   ..

    -----DDDDD----------22222---------11111-------DDDD----------DDDD--


    sort of thing. It needs to be _long_.  Start off in the middle,
near X, and move to the door [1111]. open the door, and walk through into
your own set of rooms. When you've finished, go back into the corridor,
through door [2222] and head towards X. If you make the corridor long
enough, people won't notice that you aren't actually moving towards the end,
so you can splice as many sets of peoples rooms together as you like. AND,
you can make each set into a looping animation if you want. You could even
make 2222 and 1111 further apart, with a standard "walk down the corridor"
section; people only need to render the unique bit where you can see into
their room - the corridor walk bit could be spliced in.

What do people think about this? Would it work as a solution?
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+     |
| Jerry Cullingford  #include <std.disclaimer>     [phone] |   ,-|--
| [e-mail] (was [e-mail]) or [e-mail]      x3203 |   \_|__
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+ \___/

##

Subject: ImagineComp file
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 12:56:36 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Brailsford)

I have been working on editing the ImagineComp file and
wanted to ask people if they had any preferences they want
to see for it.  Like what formats should it be stored to
(i.e. text, Word, postscript, ...)  For those that have looked
through it, I have corrected a lot of spelling errors and am
working on correcting the grammar to make it much more
readable.  Does anyone have any ideas as to how they want
each section to look?  I could take the time to make it into
a much nicer format, so let me know what ideas you all have.
Thanks.


--
    Steve Brailsford ([e-mail])   _____
    Usenet:  uupsi!vitro!sparc!fsb         \/itro Corporation
                                            14000 Georgia Ave.
    Voice:  [phone]                  Silver Spring, MD 20906

##

Subject: Re: Imagine 2.0!
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 13:26:17 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John J Humpal)

For a $100 upgrade price, Imagine 2.0 had better be *incredibly* improved!
Also, it seems that when Imagine 0.9 was first announced, Impulse promised
a terrific user's manual.  Wonder what happened...? ;-)

-John

John J. Humpal -- [e-mail] -- short .sig, std. disclaimer

##

Subject: Planets.zoo pic on hubcap
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 11:08:40 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Edward Chadez)

I've uploaded Planets.HAM onto hubcap.  This is the included .readme file:

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

Once, a while back, someone happened to mention that cresents weren't
creatable with Imagine.  Here's some proof.

The picture is *supposed* to be a large, ringed planet sitting on its
equator rather than its axis, and in the foreground, there's a smaller
moon.  The camera is situated so that the two look close to the same size,
as they would if you were positioned close to the moon, and the moon was
between you and the planet.  Enough on the physics and optical stuff.

Something to point out that I didn't plan on is the shadow of the ring on
the planet.  Kinda neat, hu?  Reminds me of the Voyager pics.  Also note
that the planet itself casts a shadow across the "top" of the ring.

The Picture is copyright Edward Chadez.

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

Use and abuse, my friends--just don't use or abuse for money. :-) :-)  And
any comments on how I could make it more realistic are always appreciated.


Edward Chadez
 -Amiga3000-

--
+--//-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|\X/ [e-mail]/Edward Chadez                CARL Systems(303)861-5319|
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

##

Subject: Re:  Imagine 2.0!
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 11:16:48 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Linton)

[e-mail] (Action Jackson) writes:

>
> Yuck!  No thanks!  I cringe everytime I load up Imagine and that horrible
> title picture shows up...  I hope the next software release will not have
> that!!
>
> -JC-
>
Do what I did, make your own title pic.  It's just a little project if you
get bored.  Actually in the newsletter it says it has the Imagine logo on it.
Who knows if it is the picture on the disk, or the title screen.


--- (Michael Linton) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
E-mail: [e-mail]
system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

##

Subject: Re: Imagine 2.0!
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 12:06:22 PDT
From: Mark Davis <[e-mail]>

Here, Here!  Imagine 2.0 had better be new for a $100.00 upgrade price.
I still may not purchase the upgrade, especially with Impulse's track record
for documentation!

mark

##

Subject: Path
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 11:31:32 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Linton)

I'm am working on an animation involving an object following a path.  The
problem is that on the first and last frames, the object is in the same place.
This results bascily an extra frame.  I thought it would be easy to
solve by not rendering the last frame, but I'm useing rotate effects on the
the same object at the same time.  If I were not to render the last frame,
anything which is rotating will miss a rotation.  How do I get an object to
follow a path, but not have it start and end at the same point.  I'm using a
closed path.  Thanks.

--- (Michael Linton) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
E-mail: [e-mail]
system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

##

Subject: Imagine...a cheaper upgrade
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 12:14:13 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Edward Chadez)

Pub fully intended.

When I first saw someone mention that the upgrade was going to set me back
ANOTHER $100, the first thing I said was "They can keep their program!"

I guess it's the same old situation where I'd have to see what I'm getting
for the $100.  If it's a wholly revamped software package, then probably
$100 isn't too bad.  But if it's just the same as Imagine 1.1 with a few
bells and whistles....  Maybe Impulse should reconsider the upgrade fee,
or provide the users with a better description of what they're getting for
the money.....

-Edward Chadez

--
+--//-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|\X/ [e-mail]/Edward Chadez                CARL Systems(303)861-5319|
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

##

Subject: Re: Imagine...a cheaper upgrade
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 12:26:19 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Edward Chadez)

On Oct 10, 12:14pm, I wrote:
} Subject: Imagine...a cheaper upgrade
}
} Pub fully intended.
  ^^^
  That's 'pun'...funny, I seem to make these typos and don't catch them
  until the letter makes it way back to me.

  On the other hand, a pub wouldn't be a bad idea to make with the object
  editor.... :-) :-)
}


--
+--//-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|\X/ [e-mail]/Edward Chadez                CARL Systems(303)861-5319|
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

##

Subject: Re: lowres animation
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 11:23:34 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Linton)

[e-mail] (Ramin Taraz) writes:

> the problem is that the palette for each frame is different.  So when you
> run the animfile, using DP4, the colors keep changing.  How do you
> tell imagine to use the same palette for all frames?
>
> Does this problem happen in ham too?
>
> [e-mail]

Instead of generating the frames first.  Select all of the frames you wnat to
render, then click on "make".  This will render the frames and put them together
into a movie.  If you are in lo res, it will ask you if you want to lock the
color pallette.  Select yes, and you will have an animation with the pallette
the same on all frames.

--- (Michael Linton) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
E-mail: [e-mail]
system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

##

Subject: Re: Imagine 2.0!
Date:    Thu, 10 Oct 91 14:51 EDT
From: "Marc Rifkin" <[e-mail]>

>I just recived my first copy of the Imagine Gazzette.  And in it was some
>rather interesting news about Imagine 2.0.  I don't know if anyone has ...
>but it looks like the upgrade price will be around $ 100.00.  Also ...

I don't know about anyone else, but I feel cheated after spending $200
for a product and now I have to spend another $100... If it is still
a 3D graphics package, it is still the same product, not something "new."
(Same sentiments to the Toaster upgrade)

I can't afford $100 upgrades!

Marc Rifkin
Integrative Technologies Lab, Penn State University
5F Mitchell Building, University Park, PA 16802
814-863-8062 or for you normal people, [e-mail]
"Hasta, la etc."

##

Subject: DCTV Directory at Hubcap?
Date: 10 Oct 91 22:15 -0500
From: "Jeff A. Bell" <[e-mail]>

The subject line basically says it all.  Would anyone object
to starting up a DCTV directory for storing Imagine pics?  How many
people on this list own a DCTV?  Would it be worth it?  I'm working on
a couple things right now that I wouldn't mind placing on Hubcap  in
DCTV format, but only if others are going to be able to view it.

I'd LOVE to see some of those pics in near 24bit (and the display format
doesn't take up all that much more room than a HAM pic..)

Ciao,

Jeff
--
[e-mail]

##

Subject: 2.0 Wish List
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 22:25:36 -0600
From: HURTT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL <[e-mail]>

    Here's something I'd really like to see in Imagine 2.0 or any 3-D
modeler in that case. Power Glove support!! Being able to position objects
in the stage editor by moving your hand around would be great! Also a special
'Glove Editor' could be made where you actually 'sculpt'a sphere into a
shape!
    Heck desribing motion & extrusion paths in space would be cool too.
I'm sure theres tons of great things that could be done.

    Chris
{       Chris Hurtt        | Computer Science |        This Space          }
{ [e-mail] |  Applications in |         For Rent           }
{   [e-mail]   |  Fine Arts Major |      (303)-466-9259        }
{  !kessener!burner!churtt |   CU - Boulder   |          PEACE!            }


##

Subject: Powerglove & Amos 3-d
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 02:13:38 -0700
From: Michael Gibson <[e-mail]>

A powerglove interface for Imagine or any other 3-d program would be
incredible. And possible, now that the encryption on the "hi-res" data from
the glove has been cracked. Over on the powerglove mailing list, there
is already C source for the Atari ST and the IBM.... Modeling points would
be great... just think, you could "push points" with your hand... you
could sculpt in 3-d in the air. That would be really cool.. and not entirely
unfeasable either.

Say, is anyone on this list messing around with AMOS 3-D ? I am a big 3-d
enthusiast, and I have been very impressed with AMOS 3-d, which is an
extension to the AMOS basic programming package that gives basic commands
to control 3-d objects. It also has a modeller with it. I have been having
a real hard time going back to Imagine after using AMOS. Why? Because AMOS
is FAST! You can move and rotate objects in real time, and program them to
zoom around with a joystick. Instant gratification! The package has its
quirks, but I think it is really cool. It can be used to generate animations
that behave under user control, or exhibit random behavior or whatever...
These animations could be *HOURS* long if you wanted them to, since they
are generated on the fly with a language... and they do not take up barely
any space, contrasted to any other animation. It doesn't have any kind of
phong shading, of course, and is a limited palette, but I was very surprised
to find some provisions for adding surface detail (crude image mapping) and
even some support for morphing! I really like the speed.

                    Michael

                [e-mail]

##

Subject: many things
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 5:14:49 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Aaron Tucker)

    Well, here are a few things:

    To the people having problems with creating animations that have a
copy of a frame: If you can't delete it because of other motion, make the
other motion end one frame earlier. Wala! Now you can delete the extra
frame.

    About IMAGINE 2.0:  If it much improved, it is worth $100, easily.
What most AMIGA users don't understand, is that software for other platforms
is very expensive. I have a review of many 3D packages for the MAC, IBM,
and some for the AMIGA. The MAC and IBM prices are very high. Some of the
software isn't better or much better than the AMIGA software, yet we are
paying hundreds less than COMPARABLE MAC software. Don't bitch about the
price forever, just buy it or don't buy it. Simple solution.

    About textures:

    The textures on 128.163.128.6 in the /textures/tapex directories are
in a RAW 8bit format as Mark Thompson pointed out. THANK YOU MARK! Anyways,
you can spens the time to also d/l PBMPLUS and use that to convert them, or
you can load up ADPRO (or RASTERLINK) and use the Sculpt Greyscale loader.
I am saving them back out as 8bit IFFs, and saving TONS of room.
    The larger files are 1024 x 1024 and the smaller files are 512 x 512.
ADPRO and RASTERLINK need this information. The textures are 8bit versions
of the pictures that come with MAPMASTER plus more. I HIGHLY RECOMMEND
getting them.

    About the ROOMS project: I, finally having some time to devote to
actual modelling, am creating a bathroom. Who knows how long it will take.
I have about half of the objects created and have all the textures I should
need ready (and brushmaps).
    Anyways, I also have a VERY easy idea about the ROOMS PROJECT. We
could each create our own room with the camera in the doorway to start. We
then proceed to do the animation. After you are done, the camera can fade
from the final frame into the start of a different room. The first and last
frames can static for 5 to 15 seconds to allow time for credits and the
fade in/out. Simple, easy, and painless. Comments?


Juan Trevino
[e-mail]

"O KEY DOUGH KEY?"   - me

##

Subject: Re: DCTV Directory at Hubcap?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 9:01:56 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Doug Dyer)

>
> The subject line basically says it all.  {  Would anyone object
> to starting up a DCTV directory for storing Imagine pics?  How many
> people on this list own a DCTV?  Would it be worth it?  I'm working on
> a couple things right now that I wouldn't mind placing on Hubcap  in
> DCTV format, but only if others are going to be able to view it.
>
> I'd LOVE to see some of those pics in near 24bit (and the display format
> doesn't take up all that much more room than a HAM pic..)
>
> Ciao,
>
> Jeff
> --
> [e-mail]
>
>
Go for it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug Dyer     *      Clemson University     *     [e-mail]
Quote 'O Fun: DOS is a bike without the seat.           skydive naked
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

##

Subject: Re: many things
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 09:52:24 EDT
From: Mark Thompson <[e-mail]>

Juan Trevino writes:
>     The textures on 128.163.128.6 in the /textures/tapex directories are
> in a RAW 8bit format as Mark Thompson pointed out.
> The textures are 8bit versions
> of the pictures that come with MAPMASTER plus more.

A minor clarification. These textures are not originally from Louis Markoya's
Map Master but digitized images from a book by Phil Brodatz called "Textures".
The images in this book are not copyrighted so anyone may digitize them.
Most of the images in Map Master are digitized from the same book. I just
wanted to make sure no one thought these images were pirated from a commercial
product.

Also on the same subject. No doubt anyone with ftp access will now want
copies of these images (textures). I might mention that many of the images
are duplicates with the only difference being the amount of image contrast.
It would be nice to organize an effort to weed out the duplicates, convert
the unique ones, and make them publically available so that we all don't
have to duplicate this effort. Each person working on this project could
take care of say 20 or so different images. The format I would advocate is
the 8bit IFF greymaps that Juan mentioned. I would be willing to help in
this effort (but I can't start till a week from today). Any interest?
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
|      `       '        Mark Thompson                 CONCURRENT COMPUTER  |
| --==* RADIANT *==--   [e-mail]        Principal Graphics   |
|      ' Image `        ...!uunet!masscomp!mark       Hardware Architect   |
|     Productions       [phone] [phone]   & General Nuisance   |
|                                                                          |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

##

Subject: Re: many things
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 07:38:49 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Edward Chadez)

On Oct 11,  5:14am, Aaron Tucker wrote:
} Subject: many things
}
}
}
}     Well, here are a few things:
}
}     About IMAGINE 2.0:  If it much improved, it is worth $100, easily.
} What most AMIGA users don't understand, is that software for other platforms
} is very expensive. I have a review of many 3D packages for the MAC, IBM,
} and some for the AMIGA. The MAC and IBM prices are very high.

But don't you see?  That's the whole point!  I didn't buy a MAC or an IBM
because the prices for the products were ridiculously high.  I think that
Impulse may just be milking that last upgrade dollar from us users...or
they may actually have a product worth upgrading to.

For me, it completely depends on the addition of some key features (that I
won't go into here).  If I decide that Mr. Halvorsen's (SP?) new product is
worthy of my hard-earned "upgrade" money, then he'll get it.  But for $100
he's going to have to do more than just change the intro picture. :-)

}
}
} Juan Trevino
} [e-mail]
}
} "O KEY DOUGH KEY?"   - me
}
}-- End of excerpt from Aaron Tucker


Edward Chadez
 -Amiga3000-

--
+--//-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|\X/ [e-mail]/Edward Chadez                CARL Systems(303)861-5319|
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

##

Subject: Re: many things
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 11:22:24 -0400
From: Udo K Schuermann <[e-mail]>

[digitized textures in RAW format]
> Mark Thompson <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> It would be nice to organize an effort to weed out the duplicates, convert
> the unique ones, and make them publically available so that we all don't
> have to duplicate this effort. Each person working on this project could
> take care of say 20 or so different images. The format I would advocate is
> the 8bit IFF greymaps that Juan mentioned. I would be willing to help in
> this effort (but I can't start till a week from today). Any interest?

Having just recently gotten ADPro (yeah!) I offer my services for the
conversion.  I think I can handle 20 images and I've got 5 Megs of RAM to
work with.  It seems like hubcap.clemson.edu would be a good place to put
the results.

I also think it would be a good idea to create a few screens with samples
of the images (such as 4x4, 9x9, or 16x16 panels) in HAM or dithered
highres because not everyone can display 24 bit images (like those of us
with DCTV).

 ._.  Udo Schuermann       "Did you ever wonder why we had to run for shelter
 ( )  [e-mail]    with the promise of the brave new world unfurled
 Seeking virtual memory     beneath the clear blue sky?" -- Pink Floyd

##

Subject: Maps
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 10:34:37 -0600
From: HURTT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL <[e-mail]>

    I'll help out with the map converting. No problem. Someone want to start
diving them up? Where do the final products go, IMAGINE/BRUSHMAPS I assume...

    Chris

##

Subject: Re:  many things
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 12:30:11 CDT
From: Wayne Haufler 283-4160 <[e-mail]>

Juan Trevino ([e-mail]) writes:
>     Anyways, I also have a VERY easy idea about the ROOMS PROJECT. We
> could each create our own room with the camera in the doorway to start. We
> then proceed to do the animation. After you are done, the camera can fade
> from the final frame into the start of a different room. The first and last
> frames can static for 5 to 15 seconds to allow time for credits and the
> fade in/out. Simple, easy, and painless. Comments?

I agree that this would be much easier to implement, and with a
volunteer group project like this, the easier it is to do the more
likely it is going to be done.

However, I am afraid that simplifying this project may dilute the
uniqueness, challenge, and excitement of it all, and thus the
motivation to do it may suffer.  IMHO the really exciting aspect about
the ROOMS PROJECT is the concept of a virtual collective object, a
house, built as a cooperative effort within cyberspace, by people who
have never actually met, as difficult as that may be.  The animation
would be a tour through that object.  The uniqueness of this
project is that it has NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE, as far as we know.
("...To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before..." 8^) ).

However, perhaps it is exciting enough that it is a joint animation
effort, and we should concentrate on that aspect.  An animation using
Juan's approach could IMPLY that it is all the same house, though it
would be somewhat discontinuous as an animation, and may only be viewed
as a collection of similar short animations.

Just some comments.  I am not saying we shouldn't follow Juan's suggestion.
If this effort is bogging down, perhaps we should compromise our earlier
grandiose ideas and use an easier approach.  Or not compromise and
patiently settle for a longer timeline.

( What am I saying 'we' for?  I didn't sign up to do a whole room,
though I will buy the final product, and am willing to donate objects
and contribute ideas.  Wish I had more time.   :/  )


         __         Wayne A. Haufler   [Christian/SW Engineer/XLib'er/Amigan]
\\ /\\ /\\ //_       [e-mail]          MDSSC - Houston
 \/--\// \//__       Hobby:"Exploring the Use of Computer Graphics and
     //                     Animations To Support Christian Endeavors"

##

Subject: IMAGINE 2.0 Upgrade
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 11:25:25 -0500
From: [e-mail]

On Oct 11,  5:14am, Aaron Tucker wrote:
} Subject: many things
}     Well, here are a few things:
}
}     About IMAGINE 2.0:  If it much improved, it is worth $100, easily.
} What most AMIGA users don't understand, is that software for other platforms
} is very expensive. I have a review of many 3D packages for the MAC, IBM,
} and some for the AMIGA. The MAC and IBM prices are very high.

I use both a Mac and an Amiga. I have yet to buy any video/graphics program
for the Mac with documentation as pitiful as what I received when I purchased
Imagine. (Further, I can't think of any other Amiga product I have purchased
with that pitiful of a documentation either!) But, just to cite one
counterexample to your statement, I have been an avid user of VideoPaint on
the Mac - it is quite good, and it has execllent documentation.  I just
received the upgrade notice for system 2.0, and the upgrade fee is $19.95!!!
So, 1) your upgrade fee analysis is not completely correct, and 2) what you
get with a typical Mac upgrade, at least in the documentation department, is
not at all comparable to what Imagine has released so far in this dept.

I agree with the author of a few notes back, that the documentation with 2.0
better be *real* good for $100. Otherwise, we might as well add on another $25
for the cost of the third-party user's manual.


Doug DeGroot

##

Subject: Pixel3D v2.0
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 09:12:52 PDT
From: Mark Davis <[e-mail]>

There is a demo floating around of Pixel3D v2.0.  If you see it
check it out.  Not only does Pixel3d create objects from bitmaps
but it also, point reduces, scales, converts to/from the popular
Amiga 3D object formats and has a NEAT interface that lets you
rotate your object in 3D space, ala Caligari, plus 'render' the
object in wire frame or shaded (color or no).  I called Axiom and
was told that a flyer was being mailed to current Pixel3D owners
re: upgrades.  As someone mentioned earlier, Interchange has got
some very good competition.  The demo does not SAVE but will allow
you to load different object formats and play around with them.
I have the demo but no FTP access, at this time :-|

mark

##

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 16:36:21 EDT
From: Mark Thompson <[e-mail]>

> I have the book "Textures", by Phil Brodatz (sp?). I'm not totally convinced
> that all the plates in the book are copyright free.

This may be true, I'll have to check for certain.

> What resolution are they available in? I think you mention 8bit IFF
> greymaps, but what resolution?

The smaller ones are 512x512 and the larger ones are 1024x1024. I propose
that they be converted to the same resolution IFF greymap (I don't want
to throw any info away). This is well within the realm af ADPro to do.

> Also, Imagine cannot use 8bit as brush maps correct?

I cannot say for certain as I use LightWave. I do know that the current
release of LightWave will accept any resolution image but currently does
not support greymaps. The soon to be released 2.0 rev WILL support greymaps
however.
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
|      `       '        Mark Thompson                 CONCURRENT COMPUTER  |
| --==* RADIANT *==--   [e-mail]        Principal Graphics   |
|      ' Image `        ...!uunet!masscomp!mark       Hardware Architect   |
|     Productions       [phone] [phone]   & General Nuisance   |
|                                                                          |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

##

Subject: Re: Maps
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 16:44:37 EDT
From: Mark Thompson <[e-mail]>

>I'll help out with the map converting. No problem. Someone want to start
>diving them up? Where do the final products go, IMAGINE/BRUSHMAPS I assume...

I have already done the first 20 in Tape1 and would be willing to do
more if need be. I should mention to anyone doing conversions to IFF
format that most of the images have a small black border on the bottom.
This MUST be cropped out or else annoying lines will show up in your
textures.
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
|      `       '        Mark Thompson                 CONCURRENT COMPUTER  |
| --==* RADIANT *==--   [e-mail]        Principal Graphics   |
|      ' Image `        ...!uunet!masscomp!mark       Hardware Architect   |
|     Productions       [phone] [phone]   & General Nuisance   |
|                                                                          |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

##

Subject: Re: Imagine 2.0!
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 11:27:45 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Linton)

"Marc Rifkin" <[e-mail]> writes:

> I don't know about anyone else, but I feel cheated after spending $200
> for a product and now I have to spend another $100... If it is still
> a 3D graphics package, it is still the same product, not something "new."
> (Same sentiments to the Toaster upgrade)
>
> I can't afford $100 upgrades!
>
> Marc Rifkin
Like I said the upgrade price has not yet been comfirmed.  So there is a
possibility that it will be cheaper.  But I know what you mean.  They should
 make it a free upgrade for those who bought it in the past 4 months, or
something like that.  If it has a lot of new features, it might be worth the
$ 100.00 upgrade price.


--- (Michael Linton) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
E-mail: [e-mail]
system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

##

Subject: Re: Imagine...a cheaper upgrade
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 11:32:07 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Linton)

[e-mail] (Edward Chadez) writes:

> Pub fully intended.
>
> When I first saw someone mention that the upgrade was going to set me back
> ANOTHER $100, the first thing I said was "They can keep their program!"
>
> I guess it's the same old situation where I'd have to see what I'm getting
> for the $100.  If it's a wholly revamped software package, then probably
> $100 isn't too bad.  But if it's just the same as Imagine 1.1 with a few
> bells and whistles....  Maybe Impulse should reconsider the upgrade fee,
> or provide the users with a better description of what they're getting for
> the money.....
>
> -Edward Chadez
>
The next Imagine Gazzette, is supposed to be allmost totally on the new
upgrade.  When I get it I will post some of the new functions, so you can
decide if it is worth the money.


--- (Michael Linton) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
E-mail: [e-mail]
system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

##

Subject: rooms
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 18:41:33 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan Price)

Juan Trevino ([e-mail]) writes:
>     Anyways, I also have a VERY easy idea about the ROOMS PROJECT. We
> could each create our own room with the camera in the doorway to start. We
> then proceed to do the animation. After you are done, the camera can fade
> from the final frame into the start of a different room. The first and last
> frames can static for 5 to 15 seconds to allow time for credits and the
> fade in/out. Simple, easy, and painless. Comments?

AND Wayne A. Haufler writes:
>I agree that this would be much easier to implement, and with a
>volunteer group project like this, the easier it is to do the more
>likely it is going to be done.

>However, I am afraid that simplifying this project may dilute the
>uniqueness, challenge, and excitement of it all, and thus the
>motivation to do it may suffer.  IMHO the really exciting aspect about
>the ROOMS PROJECT is the concept of a virtual collective object, a
>house, built as a cooperative effort within cyberspace, by people who
>have never actually met, as difficult as that may be.  The animation
>would be a tour through that object.  The uniqueness of this
>project is that it has NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE, as far as we know.
>("...To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before..." 8^) ).

Well put, Wayne, my sentiments exactly on this subject. I hope that everyone
continues to consider the possiblity of actually realizing this project.

As far as Juan's suggestion, I need some clarification:

It seems that your idea for simplifying the project is to have each
participant render their own sequence. Is this correct? I feel that this
would actually slow down the process of completing the project, in addition
to creating possible incompatabilities in terms of frame-rates, color output,
formats, etc.

In a nutshell, the initial proposal asked just to create a room of your
wildest dreams and uuencode it and send it to my address. I, and whatever
assistance I can get, will stick'em all together and render it. That's it.
Ofcourse a lot of notes had to be added to cover standardization of path-
names, etc. You could also send a 'staging' file to show paths of objects
that move during the 'visit' to your room, or placement and intensity of
light sources. If you don't want to deal with a staging file, you could
just send a note describing where lights go and such.

Read over the proposal again, or ask me to send it to you if you dont'
have it.

Another suggestion to help the ball to roll:

Does anyone think it might be a good idea to submit rooms to a "ROOMS"
directory on HUBCAP? I like making rooms and I have several I could post
just for fun, including the one with spiral stairs, and one with corinthian
columns and arches. Also, I would post 'public rooms' where anyone could
d/l, put in a piece of their own furniture, then u/l it back?

AP.

##

Subject: Re: Maps
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 18:48:36 EDT
From: Udo K Schuermann <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Mark Thompson) writes:
> I have already done the first 20 in Tape1 and would be willing to do
> more if need be. I should mention to anyone doing conversions to IFF
> format that most of the images have a small black border on the bottom.
> This MUST be cropped out or else annoying lines will show up in your
> textures.

I don't have time until the middle of next week to do this, but I will
convert Tape2 then.  If you, Mark, or someone else wants to do it in my
stead, please send me an email to that effect so we don't trample on each
others' feet ;-)

Cheers, all!

 ._.  Udo Schuermann       "Did you ever wonder why we had to run for shelter
 ( )  [e-mail]    with the promise of the brave new world unfurled
 Seeking virtual memory     beneath the clear blue sky?" -- Pink Floyd

##

Subject: Textures
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 19:56:23 -0400
From: [e-mail] (BRANHAM,JOSEPH FRANKLIN)

And I'm downloading the GIFD version I just created of directory tape3.

I'm also planning to create a 640x200 16color screen with a 4x4 matrix of
the textures in tape3. Or mayhap 3x4 since there are 12 of them.

Will put mine in brushmaps as soon as I cook them Tomorrow.

Moo
Frank Branham

##

Subject: Maps again
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 17:36:32 -0600
From: HURTT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL <[e-mail]>

    Wow! Didn't relize the size of them puppies. I'll take on the <1meg
in tape 3 then. I know that isn't much but with 3 megs I doubt ADPro will
like to load them in. I have troublt with >250K IFF24. Thats without WB or
anything.

    Chris

##

Subject: Re: Imagine 2.0!
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 91 18:08:55 CST
From: telepro![e-mail] (James Hastings-Trew)

In a message dated Fri 11 Oct 91 00:53, "Marc Rifkin" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

 MRR> I don't know about anyone else, but I feel cheated after spending
 MRR> $200
 MRR> for a product and now I have to spend another $100... If it is still
 MRR> a 3D graphics package, it is still the same product, not something
 MRR> "new."
 MRR> (Same sentiments to the Toaster upgrade)

 MRR> I can't afford $100 upgrades!

I for one am glad to see the end of Impulse's free upgrades for life policy.
When a company offers a substatial upgrade for a realistic fee it means that
they are running their business properly. This means that they will still be
around in a year, and the year after that, etc. When a company offers a
substantial upgrade for a silly fee like $5 or $10, it says to me that they
have no business sense, and that they will be going out of business, or just
won't bother upgrading very often.

A $100 upgrade fee tells me that Imagine 2.0 will be an excellent product,
that Impulse is thinking in a fiscally responsible way, and that us Imagine
owners won't be orphaned with a product that has no support and no future.


-- Via DLG Pro v0.975b

--- James Hastings-Trew    telepro![e-mail] ---
->  If everyone in China jumped at the same time <-  subliminalmessagewith
->      would they bring back TWIN PEAKS?        <-  subtlebutdeviousplan.

##

Subject: Re: many things
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 91 10:45:10 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Bob Lindabury, SysAdm)

Mark Thompson <rutgers!westford.ccur.com!mark> writes:

> Also on the same subject. No doubt anyone with ftp access will now want
> copies of these images (textures). I might mention that many of the images
> are duplicates with the only difference being the amount of image contrast.
> It would be nice to organize an effort to weed out the duplicates, convert
> the unique ones, and make them publically available so that we all don't
> have to duplicate this effort. Each person working on this project could
> take care of say 20 or so different images. The format I would advocate is
> the 8bit IFF greymaps that Juan mentioned. I would be willing to help in
> this effort (but I can't start till a week from today). Any interest?

Well, obviously I'm quite interested.  I would love to help out also
but it seems that I only have mail FTP access (via FTPMAIL) and it is
a bit flakey at best.

If the project ever gets completed, I would love someone to send me a
disk full of the textures however. <grin>

-- Bob

 The Graphics BBS  908/469-0049  "It's better than a sharp stick in the eye!"
 ============================================================================
  InterNet: [e-mail]                | Raven Enterprises
      UUCP: ...rutgers!bobsbox!graphics!bobl      | 25 Raven Avenue
    BitNet: bobl%graphics.rent.com@pucc           | Piscataway, NJ 08854
    Home #: 908/560-7353                          | 908/271-8878

##

Subject: Re: many things
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 91 10:50:52 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Bob Lindabury, SysAdm)

rutgers!carl.org!echadez (Edward Chadez) writes:

> But don't you see?  That's the whole point!  I didn't buy a MAC or an IBM
> because the prices for the products were ridiculously high.  I think that
> Impulse may just be milking that last upgrade dollar from us users...or
> they may actually have a product worth upgrading to.

I agree to a large extent.  Half the purchase price of your software
as an upgrade cost each year is a bit much in my book.

> For me, it completely depends on the addition of some key features (that I
> won't go into here).  If I decide that Mr. Halvorsen's (SP?) new product is
> worthy of my hard-earned "upgrade" money, then he'll get it.  But for $100
> he's going to have to do more than just change the intro picture. :-)

I'm not sure what the official word is going to be but if I'm going
to be asked to lay out an additional $100 for an upgrade, I would
expect at least a month of working with the new software before
making my decision.  I don't want to lay out the $100 and then find
out that the additions are not implemented in an easy to use fashion
or that they are just some cosmetic additions.  I want to get into it
deep and dirty to see if it is actually going to be worth half the
purchase price prior to my shelling out the bucks.

Some sort of 30 day money back type of deal may be workable.

-- Bob

 The Graphics BBS  908/469-0049  "It's better than a sharp stick in the eye!"
 ============================================================================
  InterNet: [e-mail]                | Raven Enterprises
      UUCP: ...rutgers!bobsbox!graphics!bobl      | 25 Raven Avenue
    BitNet: bobl%graphics.rent.com@pucc           | Piscataway, NJ 08854
    Home #: 908/560-7353                          | 908/271-8878

##

Subject: Re: DCTV Directory at Hubcap?
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 91 10:39:50 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Bob Lindabury, SysAdm)

rutgers!hubcap.clemson.edu!ddyer (Doug Dyer) writes:

> >
> > The subject line basically says it all.  {  Would anyone object
> > to starting up a DCTV directory for storing Imagine pics?  How many
> > people on this list own a DCTV?  Would it be worth it?  I'm working on
> > a couple things right now that I wouldn't mind placing on Hubcap  in
> > DCTV format, but only if others are going to be able to view it.
> >
> > I'd LOVE to see some of those pics in near 24bit (and the display format
> > doesn't take up all that much more room than a HAM pic..)
> >
> > Ciao,
> >
> > Jeff
> > --
> > [e-mail]
> >
> >
> Go for it.

I would vote *not* to start a DCTV directory on Hubcap.  It would
seem to me that we would all be better served if the images were
stored in 24-bit format.  In this way we can all convert them to the
format of our own choice without the limitations placed on images
that are stored in the DCTV format.

If images are in DCTV format, a large percentage of your audience is
going to be out-of-luck when it comes to viewing potentially
wonderful images.

-- Bob

 The Graphics BBS  908/469-0049  "It's better than a sharp stick in the eye!"
 ============================================================================
  InterNet: [e-mail]                | Raven Enterprises
      UUCP: ...rutgers!bobsbox!graphics!bobl      | 25 Raven Avenue
    BitNet: bobl%graphics.rent.com@pucc           | Piscataway, NJ 08854
    Home #: 908/560-7353                          | 908/271-8878

##

Subject: Rooms, 2.0 upgrade
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 01:51:17 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Rob Borsari)

  I am working on my room.  I repaired my GVP 030 by installng one of those
little fans from Rat Shack.  No more heat crashes.   I think that taking
the time and effort to put the rooms into a house will be worth it.  The
rooms don't all have to fit inside the 'house' as long as the doors match
up in the hallway.

On 2.0,  I have yet to see one fact.  I have seen several guesses and the
response to them.  Has anyone seen this program yet?   Has anyone talked to
mike about the price?  Has anyone figured out why there is a delete button
on the projects screen?  Lets get some facts into play here.


     Is anyone going to put a person in their room?  I made a 'pose figure'
model and was considering placeing it in my room.  Are we aiming at just
furniture and stuff or are we going to go for things like moving clocks
and tv sets?    (forgot smilys for second para.  ;) ;) ;)  )  -R-

##

Subject: DCTV directory at Hubcap..
Date: 13 Oct 91  0:59 -0500
From: "Jeff A. Bell" <[e-mail]>

> If images are in DCTV format, a large percentage of your audience is
> going to be out-of-luck when it comes to viewing potentially
> wonderful images.
>
> -- Bob

I agree.  However, storing, and up/downloading 24bit images
borders on crazy.  The only reason I mentioned setting up a DCTV
directory was due to the rather reasonable size of the display
format images.

Now, if Digital Creations were good enough to provide a DCTVtoIFF
converter, somewhat akin to the IFFtoDCTV converter that comes with
the DCTV, then we'd be in business..

Hmmm.  Anyone for a JPEG compressor?  T'would solve this dilemma
quite nicely, IMHO..  :)

Later Bob,

Jeff
--
[e-mail]



##

Subject: 24bit or dctv
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 3:02:02 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Aaron Tucker)

    I agree 100% with Bob that a DCTV directory would not be good. It
might be nice for DCTV users, but what about the other 90% of us? Having a
DCTV to IFF converter wont do any good. The reason the image is so small is
that they throw away all the data DCTV doesn't need. A pic converted from
DCTV to 24bit IFF and shown on a 24bit video board would have a lot of
artifacts from the NTSC compression algorithm they implement.

    Anyways, I think a plain 24bit directory is the best universal
solution. They should be compressed/uncompressed 24bit IFF ILBM files. That
way, everybody can use them and enjoy them.

    If you have a DCTV, when you load up your trace and edit it, save it
in the 24bit format and upload it. Then, if you want, convert it to the DCTV
format for your use or archives. If you ever upgrade to a 24bit device, you
will have access to all the data that you need. Besides, I don't think
HUBCAP is hurting on space, and you can always store your 24bit IFFs to
floppy.

    That's it. You can digest now.


Juan Trevino
[e-mail]
"O KEY DOUGH KEY"  -me



##

Subject: Re: DCTV directory at Hubcap..
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 08:18:27 PDT
From: [e-mail]

>Date: 13 Oct 91  0:59 -0500
>From: "Jeff A. Bell" <[e-mail]>
>To: [e-mail]
>Message-Id: <42*[e-mail]>
>Subject: DCTV directory at Hubcap..
>
>> If images are in DCTV format, a large percentage of your audience is
>> going to be out-of-luck when it comes to viewing potentially
>> wonderful images.
>>
>> -- Bob
>
>I agree.  However, storing, and up/downloading 24bit images
>borders on crazy.  The only reason I mentioned setting up a DCTV
>directory was due to the rather reasonable size of the display
>format images.
>
>Now, if Digital Creations were good enough to provide a DCTVtoIFF
>converter, somewhat akin to the IFFtoDCTV converter that comes with
>the DCTV, then we'd be in business..
>
>Hmmm.  Anyone for a JPEG compressor?  T'would solve this dilemma
>quite nicely, IMHO..  :)
>
>Later Bob,
>
>Jeff
>--
>[e-mail]

There're now two different JPEG compressors, for Amiga, in our libraries
on Portal.  One, under the name of "AUGJPEG.LZH" translates JPEG to
IFF24 in both directions, going thru the intermediate step of PPM
files.

The other translates JPEG directly to DCTV (onscreen only, does not
save it out to a file, but a screen grabber could). This one is
JPEG2DCTV.LZH

Perhaps Mr. Worley, who is a Portal user, could make these two available
to the mailing list folks.

I've personally stopped uploading DCTV files which are strictly limited
to DCTV owners and have instead started uploading JPEGged IFF24 files,
which, generally, are even smaller! (typically 60 to 100K or so).
The only DCTV pix I'll distribute now are those I find elsewhere, such
as on BBSes.

Regards, Harv
Moderator/Sysop
The Amiga Zone
The Portal System

##

Subject: DCTV directory at Hubcap..
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 08:43:44 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Bob Lindabury, SysAdm)

"Jeff A. Bell" <rutgers!ccu.umanitoba.ca!uubell> writes:

> > If images are in DCTV format, a large percentage of your audience is
> > going to be out-of-luck when it comes to viewing potentially
> > wonderful images.
> >
> > -- Bob
>
> I agree.  However, storing, and up/downloading 24bit images
> borders on crazy.  The only reason I mentioned setting up a DCTV
> directory was due to the rather reasonable size of the display
> format images.

Well, 24-bit IFF images compress pretty good.  I don't see a problem
with them.  And if you wanted, you can further compress them with
LHARC or some such archiver.  I still think 24-bit is the only way to
go for images.

> Now, if Digital Creations were good enough to provide a DCTVtoIFF
> converter, somewhat akin to the IFFtoDCTV converter that comes with
> the DCTV, then we'd be in business..

You still lose information.  Conversion of DCTV to IFF will lose
info.  If we are going to spend the time to create an images
directory and maintain it, the directory should contain the best
possible images.

> Hmmm.  Anyone for a JPEG compressor?  T'would solve this dilemma
> quite nicely, IMHO..  :)

JPEG has it's problems also.  I don't know if I would go for that
based on the scarcity of JPEG decompression software available for
the Amiga.

> Jeff
> --
> [e-mail]

-- Bob

 The Graphics BBS  908/469-0049  "It's better than a sharp stick in the eye!"
 ============================================================================
  InterNet: [e-mail]                | Raven Enterprises
      UUCP: ...rutgers!bobsbox!graphics!bobl      | 25 Raven Avenue
    BitNet: bobl%graphics.rent.com@pucc           | Piscataway, NJ 08854
    Home #: 908/560-7353                          | 908/271-8878

##

Subject: JPEG'ed 24bit IFFs..
Date: 13 Oct 91 14:42 -0500
From: "Jeff A. Bell" <[e-mail]>

> I've personally stopped uploading DCTV files which are strictly limited
> to DCTV owners and have instead started uploading JPEGged IFF24 files,
> which, generally, are even smaller! (typically 60 to 100K or so).
> The only DCTV pix I'll distribute now are those I find elsewhere, such
> as on BBSes.
>
> Regards, Harv
> Moderator/Sysop
> The Amiga Zone
> The Portal System

You echo my feelings on the subject, Harv.  A few people have expressed
some concern over the 'lossy' method of compression that JPEG uses, but
personally, I think that whatever is lost is more than made up by the
extremely small file sizes that result.  As well, surely a JPEGed 24bit
IFF is STILL going to look better than a HAM image of the same pic, no?

What say you Mr. Worley:  could you put the JPEG archivers onto Hubcap
so that people that do want to upload 24bit pics have the option of
compressing them to a more reasonable size?  Those of you that have
more patience than I are more than welcome to upload monster 750k 24bit
IFFs..  :) :)

Ciao,

Jeff
--
[e-mail]



##

Subject: JPEG..
Date: 13 Oct 91 14:48 -0500
From: "Jeff A. Bell" <[e-mail]>

> I have some scripts I put together to make using the JPEG stuff easier,
> but I don't have FTP access, so I'll post it to the mailing list if there
> is any interest.  You really need to go both ways (compress AND
> decompress) to see what the results look like before you send them out.
>
> I really think this will become the new standard for TRANSFER of 24 bit
> files, so let's break ground and start using it now!

By all means, post your scripts please.  Of course, people on the mailing
list will still have to get a hold of the JPEG software, but..

Exactly how many 24bit IFFs HAVE been posted to Hubcap?  How many more
would have been posted if you didn't have to spend an hour or so getting
them there?  IMHO, 24bit IFFs that have lost a bit through JPEG look much
better than no 24bit IFFs at all, no?  :)

Ciao,

Jeff
--
[e-mail]


##

Subject: Re:  Imagine 2.0!
Date:     Sun, 13 Oct 1991 13:50:46 -0600
From: Brant Coghlan <[e-mail]>

>
> > but it looks like the upgrade price will be around $ 100.00.  Also if you
>

    Comment from a long time Impulse customer.

    I will start with some conjecture and move on to facts.  If 5,000
people upgrade their Imagine's that will be $500,000 for Impulse less
the true cost of the update kit (say $10 each) and their normal operating
overhead, still leaves a fair chunk for development.  This should mean
a great improvement in the software and documentation, maybe even a
video to show you the new features, but this is Impulse.

    Their track record to date is not very good.  The Firecracker was
offered and advertised months before it was ready and then the paint
program was not finished.  Their newsletter said that VoRecOne was going
to be enhanced and that they had big plans for it, but the latest Gazzette
said that no improvements to the software are underway.  Until last week
(when the Gazzette arrived) most Canadian customers were not informed
of the upgrade to 1.1 (the previous Gazzette was not mailed to Canadians :-(
).  Early Imagine purchasers were sent Beta-ware when the release version
was delayed.  Problems with trivial solutions were never fixed (eg. exiting
show mode after clicking the Right Mouse Button).  Silver users were
promised an improved manual with Turbo Silver.  TS users were promised
a greatly improved manual with Imagine.  In addition to these, no demo
software has ever been released to allow customers to look at the products
before buying (how many Impulse customers will order Foundation with
only their word on its features?).  A demo disk with examples is almost
unheard-of.

    Lets hope that Impulse improves.  I hope that Imagine 2.0 comes
relatively bug free with a professionally written manual, a video on
how to get started and new features, and a Foundation stand alone program
offering hints and help.  I will not be holding my breath though :-)

    I apologize for this diatribe.  I get carried away every couple
of years.

    Since I rarely post here, I would like to thank everyone here for
the help and information they have provided.  This mailing list is an
invaluable resource for Imagine users.  Keep it up everyone.

-Brant Coghlan
[e-mail]   Comp. Sci. Grad Student, Uof Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta


##

Subject: Re: Another Fun Project
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 14:44:23 PDT
From: [e-mail]

>     Happy rendering everyone! ps- if anyone has a good idea for a candle
> flame let me know!

One of my students made a jack-o-lantern about two weeks ago, similar
to what you described here. I should mention first of that the student
who did this is none other than Sean Cunningham who was a prominent
and oft contributor to this mailing list. For those of you wondering
where he has been, he was accepted to Calarts this year and is busy
working with Imagine and Journeyman in our lab. He doesn't currently
have net access, but in the near future (a week or two) Calarts will
be it's own node and Sean C will be back.

At any rate, he made a jack-o-lantern and put a couple light orangeish
lights inside the pumpkin, then had the lights change position for
every frame. I made incredible light patterns and textures on the
floor in front of the pumpkin that looked like a flickering candle.
Don't forget to turn on "cast shadows" for the lights.

=======================================================================
Sean Schur                        USENET: [e-mail]
Assistant Director SGI/Amiga/Media Lab        Compuserve: 70731,1102
Character Animation Department
California Institute of the Arts
=======================================================================


##

Subject: DCTV
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 20:14:02 GMT-0500
From: Scott Matthew Krehbiel <[e-mail]>

I, for one, just got DCTV, and would love to see some images in 24-bit of
some of your stuff.  I think a DCTV directory would be a good idea.

[e-mail]

##

Subject: power glove
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 20:23:08 GMT-0500
From: Scott Matthew Krehbiel <[e-mail]>

I would try the power glove idea, if I was a GURU, and had the Imagine
Object format.  I like to try writing my own object modifiers ( nowhere near
the complexity of editors ).  Is the Imagine object format released yet?
Is it posted anywhere?

Does anyone have the issue of A/C Tech that had code and connections for a
power glove driver?  It seems like all the 'stuff' is waiting, we just
need some ambitious GURU ( who could become quite rich, if Impulse buys )
to write the thing.

Oh well, I'll just keep dreaming about going Computer Science in grad. school.
-Scott

##

Subject: JPEG available...
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 91 1:27:41 MET
From: [e-mail]

For anyone who is interested...
The free JPEG group (I think this is what they are called, they dont know
themselves what they are called :-) has released their first public
version of their jpeg-package.
FTP acess at: uunet.uu.net in directory /graphics/jpeg
the file is called jpegsrc.v1.tar.Z
It contains all sourcecode to compile a jpegtoppm and a ppmtojpeg program.
Makefiles are available for amiga, lots of unix machines, pc etc etc.


Henrik


##

Subject: Re: Powerglove & Amos 3-d
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 15:37:57 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Linton)

Is your computer accelerated?  Since I got my A3000, Amos has not been working
quite right.  Do you know if there is a program in the 1.3 upgrade that will
allow it to work properly on a 3000.  I was thinking of getting Amos 3-D, but
since Amos dosen't work right (sniff sniff), I think I'll have to wait until
I can figure out how to get it to work.  Thanks.


--- (Michael Linton) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
E-mail: [e-mail]
system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

##

Subject: Re: lowres animation
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 15:49:48 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Linton)

[e-mail] (Ramin Taraz) writes:

> >
> It asked me if I wanted a looping animation, and then asked me if
> it should delete the pictures after it is done,
> then the screen flashes 2 or 3 times and then imagine start generating the
> first frame.
> So, I have no idea whats wrong.
>
> Any sugestions?
>
> [e-mail]
>
Hmmm, I just tried it and it didn't work.  I thought for sure that's what you
had to do.  I'll play around with it some more tonight and see if I can figure
out what to do.

--- (Michael Linton) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
E-mail: [e-mail]
system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

##

Subject: Re:  Sort Problem
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 91 11:19:57 EDT
From: F. Felixberto <[e-mail]>

> I took a disk and took a 45 degree section of it for the corner of some
> 2d object.  I have just the edges and I add 2 lines and flip the disk to
> create a bottom edge.  (I'm making a path for an E without the middle bar).
> Now, I select all the points in order (I knew that from Silver) and selected
> SORT.  So I take another disk and extrude it along that path.  Well, it looks
> like I didn't sort it at all! ...
> ...stuff deleted...
> Worley suggested that I try it with sorting the edges.  That changed it a l
> but it starts at the 2nd point and goes on for a few points just fine and then
> CHAOS!  I read the manual and had no luck...

The SORT does work but from what I can tell, all it does is rearrange the
order in which points (edges, faces, etc.) will be selected using the
Select Next, Select Prev commands.

What you can do is delete all the edges and then add edges in the order in
which you want the path to go.  This shouldn't take more effort than trying
to sort the edges you already have.

                        felix

##

Subject: Upgrade Comment
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 18:17:01 EST
From: [e-mail] (Martin Gardiner)

I hope that Imagine 2.0 has alot of new features, and a very good manual.
Or I will have to go over to some other piece of software, and possibly
hardware platform (while being one of Australia's best Amiga Professional
programmers, IBM hardware is cheap for CPU, and the software is getting
alot better).

On the $100 upgrade, to stop people getting upset, especially if they just
purchased a Imagine 1.x, make Imagine 2.0 cost $50-$100 more.

PS. I can't wait to give it a try, $100 or $200 upgrade cost.

Martin Gardiner (Programmer/Animator)

##

Subject: Textures? Sure!
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 91 13:41:31 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Worley)

Everybody seems to love the Brodaz (sp?) textures. There are many more
sites (well, at least one more) with textures.... Here's one that
I've been using. It's at the FTP site incisal.rutgers.edu.

It has many of the Brodaz textures:  (in /brodaz)

ahdh.tar
beans.Z
burlap.Z
cork.Z
fieldstone.Z
grass.Z
ice.Z
marble.Z
mica.Z
paper.Z
peb54.Z
pebbles23.Z
pellets.Z
pig.Z
raffia.Z
reptile.Z
ricepaper.Z
seafan.Z
straw.Z
tree.Z

And some unique ones in the /textures directory:

bread.cvl.Z
burlp1.cvl.Z
cfood.cvl.Z
floor.cvl.Z
kitty.cvl
paper.cvl.Z
rug1.cvl.Z
rug2.cvl.Z
sponge.cvl.Z
table.cvl.Z
therm.cvl.Z
towel.cvl.Z
turf.cvl.Z
wall.cvl.Z
woodta.cvl.Z


Enjoy!

-Steve

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Worley                                       [e-mail]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

##

Subject: DCTV
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 91 17:24:38 GMT-0500
From: Scott Matthew Krehbiel <[e-mail]>

After writing that DCTV response, I finished reading my mail, and agree
that 24-bit would be better.  I also realized that it sounded like I
was stepping on many peoples toes.  Sorry, bad phrasing.

-Scott

##

Subject: jpeg "lharced" on hubcap
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 91 21:02:41 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Doug Dyer)

OK,
  there is a JPEG directory on hubcap with jpeg LHARCED.
  there is a 24BIT directory in PICTUES.

use them as you wish:)

Doug "Wish I had 24-bit color" Dyer
Clemson "A place where a guy hasn't 24-bit color OR a football team" University

##

Subject: Has anyone tried this?
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 91 12:08:53 JST
From: [e-mail] (Manjit Bedi)

Since I got my DCTV, I have been playing with digitising things from the
real world and I have been wondering about doing things with the images.

For instance, I would like to do things to the images like slew the
bits around to create a staggered image.  Perhaps a simple diagram is
in order:

    ||||||||                 \\\\\\
        ||||||||        ----- >  //////
        ||||||||                 \\\\\\
        ||||||||                 //////
                                    ^
          ^                         |____ and do this to it
          |_____ imagine this is a picture


Perhaps these things are possible in ADPro; I simply do not know not
having it.  I was wondering abour creating special lenses in Imagine
and positioning them between the camera and the image mapped as a
brush to a plane.

Or another one is to make the image look likes it being viewed through
a somewhat opaque plane of glass.

I am curious to hear what others might have been doing with digitised
images and renderiing software or whatever.  I recall Steve Worley
posted an interesting little project a long time ago about putting an
image of a person on a sphere and animating it.

Also, it looks like I am going back to Vancouver, Canada in November
and I would like to stay on this list.  I have seen a few Vancouver
types on the list; could one of you contact and tell how getting the
list.


     Manjit Bedi ( [e-mail])

     Here at this location until sometime in November.

##

Subject: Refraction Index
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 91 22:20:03 PDT
From: [e-mail]

A long time ago someone posted quite an extensive listing of indexes
of refraction for all sorts of materials. It might not have been
posted here, it might have been on one of the Amiga newsgroups.
But does anyone have this list or know where I can get it?

=======================================================================
Sean Schur                        Usenet: [e-mail]
Assistant Director Sgi/Amiga/Media Lab        Compuserve: 70731,1102
Character Animation Department
California Institute Of The Arts
=======================================================================

##

Subject: Possibly goofy suggestion: a sub mailing list for Objects...
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 91 13:34:32 JST
From: [e-mail] (Manjit Bedi)

Being one without FTP access, I am envious of people who have it.
Would it be worth while to set up a separate mailing list for objects,
textures and such for those who do not have FTP access?  The
justification of such an endeavor depends on how many of us are on the
list who do not have FTP access and would like such a thing.  It is
merely an idea that I would like to through for discussion.
Admittedly, this list would have to be limited to things of reasonable
size considering many of have limitations on the amount of mail we
could handle.  But wouldn't it be nice if someone created a nifty new
texture and then sent it out on a list for distribution?  Or perhaps in
lieu of mailing list how about an alt.amiga.graphic.binaries to handle
this.  Occasionally, I have seen IFF files on alt.binaries.pictures.
Perhaps more of us could post some of pix to there. Any thoughts on this?

     Manjit Bedi ( [e-mail])

     Here at this location until sometime in November.

##

Subject: Imagine Gazette
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 91 23:59 MST
From: "Vax Headroom (Dave E Martin)" <[e-mail]>

So, how often to these Imagine Gazettes come out?  I have yet to
recieve anything from impulse.  Its been at least 4 months since I sent
in my registration.  When did the last Imagine Gazette come out?

[e-mail]
[e-mail]

I am not at .mit.edu (if the subject line says that.)

##

Subject: Re:  Refraction Index
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 91 11:06:15 -0600
From: HURTT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL <[e-mail]>

    In Mr. Worley's Glass tutorial he mentions a few:

    Air 1.02
    Ice 1.309
    Alcohol 1.329
    Water 1.333
    Glass 1.50
    Quartz & Salt 1.644
    Diamond    2.417

    Or if you are abmitous you can sift thru  the CRC Handbook for Physics
(I think, maybe Chemistry). Theres tons listed, but most are not in common
names. 'Hmm, I want that plane to have the refraction of a 2,2 dimethyl 1
cyclohexane.' :-)

    Chris
    [e-mail]

##

Subject: re: Imagine Gazette
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 91 10:36:08 PDT
From: Mark Davis <[e-mail]>

I think it is called the Impulse gazette.  I received mine on
Thursday, in Seattle.

mark

##

Subject: re: Imagine Gazette
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 91 10:11:28 PDT
From: "Jim Lange" <[e-mail]>

What exacly is 'The Imagine Gazette'?  Is it published by Impulse?  I upgraded
from Turbo Silver to Imagine and therefore have been a registered user for
several months and I have never seen one.  I have received the Impulse
newsletter periodically, but not recently.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Lange                [e-mail]
Oracle Corporation            {uunet,apple,hplabs}!oracle!jlange
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

##

Subject: re: Imagine Gazette
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 91 12:41:01 EDT
From: F. Felixberto <[e-mail]>

The Imagine Gazette is the same thing as the Impulse newsletter, I got mine
yesterday.  I guess they just changed the name.

                        felix

##

Subject: Re: DCTV Directory at Hubcap?
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 19:05:35 CST
From: shrapnel!rtillery (Rick Tillery)

:I would vote *not* to start a DCTV directory on Hubcap.  It would
:seem to me that we would all be better served if the images were
:stored in 24-bit format.  In this way we can all convert them to the
:format of our own choice without the limitations placed on images
:that are stored in the DCTV format.
:
:If images are in DCTV format, a large percentage of your audience is
:going to be out-of-luck when it comes to viewing potentially
:wonderful images.

I second that.  Let's use the JPEG format to get the most from 24 bits.
The images will not lose any data as they do through DCTV, and they are
usually smaller than DCTV images.

I'll uuencode and post the software and some easy scripts if you all
agree. (sorry, I don't have FTP access)

I'm leaving in less than three weeks, so I may only have access to this
list through Portal.  My home machine is easier, so act now!

/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\
|  Rick Tillery         @uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu:occrsh!shrapnel!rtillery |
|                       [e-mail]                   |
|                                                                       |
| "I'd rather be ray-tracing...and with my multitasking Amiga, I AM!!!" |
|  ======= Always willing to trade 24 bit, JPEG, and/or GIF pics ====== |
\-----------------------------------------------------------------------/

##

Subject: Re: DCTV directory at Hubcap..
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 91 19:13:30 CST
From: shrapnel!rtillery (Rick Tillery)

:> Hmmm.  Anyone for a JPEG compressor?  T'would solve this dilemma
:> quite nicely, IMHO..  :)
:
:JPEG has it's problems also.  I don't know if I would go for that
:based on the scarcity of JPEG decompression software available for
:the Amiga.

No problem.  The free software works fantastic, and it's compatible with
ADPro's JPEG module (the beta version that Harv Laser is using).  It has
a 100% mode that shrinks images from 5 to 10 times, and with a little
image loss (I'm picky, but many images don't need the 100% mode) you can
get compression to 15 or 20 times.  I've got several 60K 768x480 images
that look fine.  That amounts to 18 times.

Any interest?  Huh? :-)

/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\
|  Rick Tillery         @uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu:occrsh!shrapnel!rtillery |
|                       [e-mail]                   |
|                                                                       |
| "I'd rather be ray-tracing...and with my multitasking Amiga, I AM!!!" |
|  ======= Always willing to trade 24 bit, JPEG, and/or GIF pics ====== |
\-----------------------------------------------------------------------/

##

Subject: JPEG source problem
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 91 19:25:34 EET
From: Juha Kallioinen <[e-mail]>

 Has anyone got those sources for the JPEG-converters to compile ? I've
got SAS/C 5.10 and with the included makefile (apparently for MANX) it
doesn't compile at all.. and with little fiddling (with the compiler and
linker names :) ) I just managed to get a lot of errors and failed compiles..

 So, would some guru out there compile the sources for us not-so-gurus out
here :)

--
o------------------------o-----o-------------------------------------------o
| [e-mail] /   __ |_______/ Tomorrow will be canceled \_______|
| Juha Kallioinen      / __/// |       \  due to lack of interest. /       |
o---------------------o  \\X/  o-------------------------------------------o

##

Subject: brush maps
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 91 20:08:26 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dan Drake)

Well, her is another one of the infamous "brush mapping" questions :-)

I created a sphere (for a planet), and made a brush in DPAINTIII that
was a large square, (lets say 320x300), that had a blue background, and
white clouds on top.  The idea was to wrap this brush around the sphere, and
then as the planet rotates, the clouds will look like they are moving and
swirling.  The only hang up is that it never comes out even remotely close
to what I want.  I can only see the bottom of the planet, and the clouds are
very very small.  All of the colors are a shade of dark puke yellow.
I got this far following the tutorials in the 91 compendium.  I moved the
axis of the brush down to the bottom of the front view, then stretched it
locally to the top.  Is the move supposed to be in local mode too?  I am
rendering in scan-line mode as this is going to be a long anim.  Do maps
work in scan-line?  Maybe I can get what I want through the camo texture?
Has anyone tried this yet?

BTW: I have also created a pretty neat lamp by spinning a outline, then
putting a light inside of the bell shaped housing.  I had a lamp shining
down on a chess board with a silver ball on it.  The results were what you
would expect them to be to.

dan.