Nolita
17th November 2004 20:24 UTC
Just about a week in and 3D allready
Hee,
Not strictly. Of course the 3 dimensionality is more due to the raw materials. I managed to include a bit of beginner's code, and in areas where I borrowed, I started changing coordinates more. I'm getting braver now. I avoided using pure black, and pure white as much as possible. A lot of floral motifs, beginning with a sphere(jaarka's) petals become 3d and translucent, they shimmer even. I'm keeping it in mind for wings, both fairy and butterfly. Also keeping it in mind for a possible alien motif, and flower petals(3 dimensional rotation instead of 2 dimensional rotation).
The illusion of 3d files were actually very difficult to make. I couldn't sleep last night, so the hours were easy to come by. Once I figured out how to get the tunnel effect with the sphere in the center, the rest sort of fell into place, and it became fun with designs and patterns. Just having Tuggummi's movement from Club Seizure, wasn't enough. I had to adjust for the fact that my "base" file(jaarka's sphere) has different coordinates. After that it's kind of a blur(I really should have taken notes).
I kept wishing the particle fountain APE had more options. Since every time I tried to use it, it just looked weak, I avoided using it(was so impressive when I first started fiddling around in the editor too:().
Also I learned more about customizing texer2, so I'm happy about that.
All in all the presets are very watchable(to me anyway;)) But that's why I decided to bring them here and post them. I'm wonderring if I even have an eye for what looks good in a preset.
^..^
17th November 2004 20:49 UTC
That are some amazing presets! I like them (although some look too similar). My personal favourite is "Illusion of 3D filligree". But all in all you're doing a nice colorwork, for sure! :up:
Originally posted by Nolita
I kept wishing the particle fountain APE had more options. Since every time I tried to use it, it just looked weak, I avoided using it(was so impressive when I first started fiddling around in the editor too:().
As many wise Avs'er said before: Nearly everything the built-in render-effects can, can be done with a superscope, and much better!
So take this as an incentive to improve your coding-skills, step by step. Someday you'll be able to code a fountain, that is much better. I have to admit that i don't have a concrete idea right know how to do it, but it is possible, perhaps a more skilled avs'er can help you out.
Volunteers, one pace forward! ;)
Nolita
17th November 2004 22:47 UTC
Thanks for the replies. ^..^ you're so supportive and helpful. So far nothing but constructive criticism:) that's the kind I like.
S-uper_T-oast, I'm a little confused by your post "Particles, fancy formulas, and having Unconed's brain helps a lot too." I think you're mostly kidding, but I don't get the bit about Particles and fancy formulas. I didn't use particles, unless texer2 counts as particles. Fancy formulas? I totally credit where I got bits of code, presets, and tutoring from. I thanked everyone I could think of, except for god and my mother;). I mentioned Unconed in a previous post, but except for learning where to place the color elements in the tree, I didn't use anything from Unconed. I did use a great deal of the information from Pak-9's manual however.
I also used a bit of info from an online tutorial that breaks down ellipses into plain english, with examples(used it to help with movements, dms, superscopes, and one of the texer files). Right now I'm just not comfortable with doing more than changing values and parameters(still learning how everything works).
On the other hand though, I really think you're just picking on me, on account of I'm the new kid, and well, it's just so easy. I just don't quite get the joke. That's what emoticons are for you know? A smiley or a quick "j/k" can shine a whole different light on things:)
Not angry, just a bit confused.
S-uper_T-oast
18th November 2004 05:37 UTC
I am almost always joking around here (just rummage around in the recycle bin for many good examples), but the mian ideas are there.
One way to make a fountain is to create a particle engine. This collection of equations treats each dot in a superscope as it's own individual point or particle, and keeps track of each particles indivdual position, speed, direction, color, etc... The formulas and routines that you write for the engine cause it to have different effects. Some things you can do are motion, gravity, direction, and speed. From those, you cause each specific particle to move in a specific way, and this (in your case), would make the fountain.
The unconed's brain part refers to the fact that his fountain presets are the ones that most readily pop to the top of my head. This is also a pretty advanced way of making superscopes and requires you to know a whole lot about the way a superscope draws the shape, and the coding you can use.
S-uper_T-oast
21st November 2004 22:43 UTC
supertoast's megabuf/gmegabuf tutorial
for the sake of the tutorial, megabuf() and gmegabuf() are interchangeable in the descriptions, the only difference is what buffer they store too. megabuf() stores to a local buffer that is only accessible by the current component, gmegabuf() stores to a global buffer that is accessible by any component
Megabuf() is used to return a variable from a one million digit buffer.
By using the code
megabuf( # )
the string will return the number (
#) from the buffer.
To assign numbers to the buffer, use the code
assign( megabuf( # ) , value )
This will assign the number
value to the buffer spot
#
-Example
::Init::
n = 1; //Set n=1 to draw a single point
assign( megabuf( 3 ) , .8 ); //set the buffer spot 3 to equal .8
assign( megabuf( 145 ) , -.3 ); //set the buffer spot 14 to equal -.3
::Per Pixel::
x = megabuf( 3 ); //set the x-cordinate equal to the value of the buffer spot 3
y = megabuf( 145 ); //set the y-cordinate equal to the value of the buffer spot 145
::drawmode = dots::
This will make a superscope with one point at (.8,-.3)
advanced stuff
Once you understand the basics of buffers, you can use more advanced commands to store and withdraw from them. Some useful things to learn are the exec2() and loop() commands.
-exec2(
string1 ,
string2 )
Exec2 basically acts as running to seperate functions at the same time. A way to show this is make a simple example.
::init::
n = 9; //set the number of points to 9
::perframe::
k = -.8; //sets our arbitrary custom counter to -.8 every frame
::perpixel::
exec2( assign( x , k ) , assign( k , k + .2 ) ); //executes the two expression, x = k, and k = k + .2
drawmode = 0; //Sets the drawmode to dots\
This will create a dotted line at y=0 from -.8 to .8
This is an example of a point-per-point superscope, it takes each point in the series and assigns it a specific x and/or y value based on the position it has in the series. The variable
k increases in value of .2 each pixel along the line, but since we are using the exec2() command, the points x-value is assigned to the amount of
k then
k increases by .2. The perframe expression
k = -.8 acts a reset to out counter varible
k so that it doesn't continue growing to infinity.
-loop(
count ,
statement )
The loop command causes the
statement to repeat
count number of times. What this means is that if you use the code
loop( 10 , assign( k , k + 1 ));
It will go through the statement
assign( k , k + 1 ) 10 times and would end up with the variable
k being equal to 10.
-Usage with megabuf()
These three expressions can be connected together for limitless applications. An example of one would be
loop( 10 , exec2( assign( k , k + 1), assign( megabuf(k) , k )));
What this will do is
1 - loop 10 times through the statement
2 - the stament will execute the two strings every time its looped through
3 - it will first assign our counter variable
k with
k + 1
4 - Secondly, it will assign the megabuf spot
k to the value of
k
What you end up with is the megabuf spots 1-10 having the values of 1-10 sequentially.
notes
-
k is an arbitrary variable used as a custom counter
-some of the terms are a little messed up (statment, expression, string, etc...) if anyone can come up with better wordings please tell me
-if you have any more question PM me
^..^
22nd November 2004 16:32 UTC
Quote:
Tuggummi
23rd November 2004 01:57 UTC
I freakign skipeepd some parts, but i learned some parties. fukc i learnmed from a pak-9 tutor, fuck me im so lame :igor: But it was no good i still hd to earn fro mscratch pretty miach.... lol u duck pak-9 :p
PAK-9
23rd November 2004 13:51 UTC
er.. yea thanks
^..^
23rd November 2004 20:59 UTC
for whoever gets the point.. :confused:
Warrior of the Light
23rd November 2004 21:18 UTC
You get it if it's up to me :)
point: --> . <--
sorry 'bout the offtopic
^..^
23rd November 2004 21:28 UTC
no, sorry this is the point to catch:
oh, one moment please, here it goes:
wait here:
catch it:
over there:
Got it: => ( . )
Nolita
26th November 2004 02:30 UTC
Sorry,
I figured the thread died, so now, I'm going off topic in a sense, but only because the topic changed. I didn't copy. What I used was a single movement from one of Tuggummi's presets, and jaaka's sphere. Things like color, and manipulation of shapes, etc. I did that(even if I'm still too new to really figure out exactly how I did it). I totally gave credit to what I did use, and untill I can figure out how to have the white with subtly swirly colors in the center of the sphere type shape(without using the sphere), the sphere will stay there.
I mean, I must not get it at all. I'm learning about x, y, and z coordinates and how they work within AVS. I'm also slowly but surely starting to wrap my brain around the math. I am learning how to make shapes, but it's taking some time. Solid shapes are semi-easy, so long as they have straight edges, but trying to fill a circle using superscope is still beyond my grasp(not complaining, just telling the truth is all).
So my question to Matt is, did you even read the initial post? Also, if you did in fact download the presets did you even bother to read the comment? Plain as day I give credit, and it's easy as pie to find the exact ape/sphere/movement I borrowed. Open them and you'll see that yes, while I did use bits from two, count them two other presets, what I made looks like neither of those presets(except for the one preset with interleaving, because I was trying to figure out how Tuggummi did something, and hey, I still haven't figured it out). But even that one doesn't really look like the original(precisely because I haven't figured it out, but when I do figure it out, then I won't be using it in any way similair to how Tuggummi would).
Reading what Tuggumi said, I both agreed and disagreed with him. On the one hand, yes it would be better to lose the 3d sphere(for more than one reason I'm sure, it's probably sucking up a ton of cpu usage, and the fps could definitely be better). I didn't read his, or anyone but your post(MattFury), as saying I full on copied anyone. Face it, there's only so many ways to make a wheel, sphere, or even a simple circle. Heck there's only so many ways to make even a line. So what of it?
I thought I made it clear that I only want to know if I even have an eye for what looks good in a preset. I could spend years learning how to write code, and optimize it. If I don't have an eye for what looks good, then those years would be wasted as I could put them to better use learning to code something less artistic and more utillitarian than AVS presets.
I never said I was the shit. Never claimed to be a fucking genius. Allways said, and still say, I'm a beginner, and still learning. I wouldn't take offense, except for that I really did think of it as a learning experience. I was learning how to do different things. I still am.
I don't mind if the thread strays/strayed off topic, there's some usefull learning material in here.
I just can't help but resent the implication that all I did was copy. No I didn't write the whole damn thing from scratch. But guess what. I never claimed I did. Good Gravy, child. You really have a knack for getting my back up. All I ever did to you was try to be nice, even when everyone else was throwing so many flames, you must surely have been worried about a backdraft. Quick word of advice, learn to read the lines before you try to read between them.
What I got from the posts was two things(not including ^..^'s kind words of encouragement), was A. using the 3D sphere is a waste of resources, and B. information about particles and megabuff. Maybe I should try reading between the lines, but I think that would in and of itsself be accusatory.
I'm sorry I turned into a mega-bitch from hell there, but it gets on my nerves. I mean, I thought of the things I was using as being more like templates(that yes I did change some things in, but I thought that was allowed, really make it more clear). I mean if we're not allowed to do that(even when it's for learning purposes, I mean it's not like I went and submitted my newbie crapola to Winamp, then clearly state 'Don't do a damn thing with my code! No ifs ands or buts about it. Don't touch it, don't experiment with it, don't even think about including it in even an experimental project, you blitherring moron!' I'm sorry but if it's sugar coated with 'Give credit where credit's due' I will believe that's what's necessary. I'm just stupid like that(many other ways as well, I'm sure).
Tuggummi
26th November 2004 03:25 UTC
First thing: Ignore MaTT, he goes by the name of MATT-"Flame-Magnet"-FURY around here. The guy has gotten more flames in the past month than we usually give in a year. And that's a lot since this is the AVS forums, the most unfriendly place in the world ;)
And second... What i ment (but probably wasn't too clear on it) is that it is just plain pointless to use a complicated shape behind all the other stuff if you can't recognize the shape. The same thing could be done with something far more easy for sure.
And there is nothing wrong of using other people's stuff as long as you do give credit, just make sure that when you do use it, it comes to a need. That's all :)
Nolita
26th November 2004 04:21 UTC
Thanks for explaining more Tuggummi. See, I'm working on figuring out something more simple, (other things as well). The very first thing I did after reading your first reply, was to delete the sphere. It did look almost the same, but I lost that soft pastel, almost candy texture I liked so much(also some of the more opaque qualities in other presets besides the two more solid looking ones.) Liked? I mean, like so much. I still like these, even if everyone hated them I would still like them. I just don't like the notion that using some semi-common sense would be considerred copying. I guess I'm too sensitive.
Anyway, I'm thinking I may be able to get something much nicer even using the solid rectangle from Pak-9's tutorial(are there more ways to make rectangles than just what you find in that tut?).
I did manage to make some custom bitmaps(more fun with texer 2 yay:)) Also I managed to make a really crappy visualization which included a .AVI file(I made that completely myself using the script feature of Painter). I was mainly trying to see if the .AVI ape works. If I'm understanding correctly lower fps is better, right? Because I can't get the .AVI below 36 fps in AVS. I have a feeling that learning to use megabuffer would probably help(don't know why, I just do).
p.s.
Off the wall idea, but I think it might work even though I haven't seen it anywhere in the forums:
In Pak-9's tutorial, and also the help files included with the SDK we learn that the 3D environment is made up of x, y, and z axes, more or less like in many if not all 3d modelling and animation packages. I have this idea, and want to work it out on my own(that is if you all think it's even feasable to make it work). Basically, I would start with a circle(though other shapes would work too once I learn how to make them, so far I can make a circle and a rectangle/square), anyhow, the circle would obviously be a superscope. I would then copy it and rotate it along an axis(probably z), I would repeat that process untill I had what appears to be a solid shape. I think this would work for curved shapes. For some reason I think a box or a pyramid shape could be made by making the shape in a specific rotation for each side. I'm probably over simplifying the concept. I'm just wonderring if it would be way too much data for AVS to handle, well, efficiently.
PAK-9
26th November 2004 07:16 UTC
People make solid 3D shapes in AVS all the time, they are pretty expensive in terms of frame rate but they look pruuuteey. 'Curved shapes' as you call them, such as cylinders and spheres (the shape you described though you may not be aware) are often made as well but are usually more expensive. A sphere for example is exponentially more expensive than a plane.#
Just download some more technical packs and see what people do.
S-uper_T-oast
26th November 2004 15:32 UTC
Also, to make really cool looking 3D solids, you have to make it so that it has really cool color shading, so it just doesn't look like a big blob on the screen, but an actual 3D object.
^..^
26th November 2004 17:28 UTC
It's so mean, that you have that much time for avsing.
You started 3-4 weeks ago, right? And look, now you're working on 3D stuff and else.
I learned so much from the forums and all the tutorials etc since i started to make more ambitious presets, too. But i have to postpone so much things till the semester ends, that i don't really make a clear progress.
I definitely don't mean it nastily, i just find it unfair somehow. Cause I want to learn more, too. :(. Damn study-stress.
Sorry for the offtopic.
Nolita
27th November 2004 00:01 UTC
Ah, well, I've been working with 3D software all this time as well. So in a sense that's probably an unfair advantage, since it makes you think in terms of axes and 3 dimensional space. In 3DS Max and other similair apps what I described is how you would go about making such shapes if there weren't buttons that allow you to just click and drag a shape into being. I've been learning nurbs, and so within nurbs shapes a lot of what you're doing is copying a nurbs line and rotating it a small ammount, adjusting a bit then copying and rotating again. Also it's rotating in both positive and negative (I call them arcs).
Part of it though, is to take Pak-9's advice and actually sketch out shapes on paper. Because I'm still learning, I don't have anything completely original to show yet. You probably do though(so see, you're tons better than you thought:)).
At any rate ^..^, try to get your hands on some 3d software, whether it's something fancy like Maya or Max, or even freeware like 3D Anim8or. I mean if you're at all interrested in 3D. Because it's allready set up as a 3 dimensional environment, with tons of help files and tutorials available, you'll start to see what's explained in the AVS tutorials in a less abstract way. Untill we're more experienced, the sketching, and the 3D creation and animation software makes it easier to understand what all those letters and numbers mean.
BTW, I thought using a calculator would help big time. So I downloaded a scientific calculator, and tried using it. Even if you cut and paste a bit of code from one of the greats, a bit of code that's tried and true, you'll receive a message telling you that some parameters are missing. Of course I should have expected that, since in Artero's tutorial it clearly says this isn't exactly true trigonometry. Nevertheless I was surprised. So that's why I call this stuff fuzzy mathematics(probably not even the right term for it). Because it's not like the math you study in algebra class, not even exactly the same as you learn through the trig info you get from books and online tutorials. I think it's a bit easier to understand when you open a bit of AVS code and look at it while reading a trig tut. But still it's a special math all it's own. I think that's a really good thing. It's especially good for people who think they're lousy at math(I always thought I was terrible at math, but then algebra changed that, even though it was mostly x's and y's suddenly there was something to visualize other than digits, and I got it, finally).
Hey, don't feel bad though, if you're in college then I'm a bit jealous of you, because I could never afford to go to a university.
Nolita
27th November 2004 00:17 UTC
Quick and off topic:
I just had a brain storm. It's for experienced folks with completely original code of course. It's also for folks who aren't shy about taking money in exchange for work.
What if you approached a local boutique or even department store with an idea of displaying AVS visualizations/presets in their window displays? The visualizations could be displayed on a series of monitors behind the fashions, or projected behind them. People would stop because the music would catch their ears and the visualizations would catch their eyes. I think it could even work for music stores. The cool thing, well, one of the cool things, about AVS is it's not age specific. My 60 year old mother likes AVS(well she liked what I did with it, and also the presets included in Winamp), and my 9 year old nephews like it. Everyone from a baby to a grandmother can appreciate it. Get people to stop and they're sure to shop:)
It's just an idea. I just think it's realistic, because the hardware involved can be as inexpensive or as expensive as the store(s) would go for. A boutique has maybe two to four small windows for display, while a department store has usually the better part of a block for displaying things in it's windows. So arranging monitors into an interresting design/shape(almost sculptural) then displaying AVS on them would be really cool.
Equally cool, would be to find a gallery that would allow you to do basically the same thing. It would probably be even cooler.
MaTTFURY
27th November 2004 00:59 UTC
random post #1 :) ... thanks im not a junior anymore im quite forgetful thats all... not stupid ... forgetful of everything! i passed my maths exam btw! :D thanks... it really helped with all the avs stuff especially Pak-9, lol @ tuggumi *is always like this*
^..^
27th November 2004 12:31 UTC
your idea sounds great (how doesn't need some extra-money ;) ). But if you did that you would have to assure not to use ANY stuff someone else made, including ideas or styles you took from other presets. First because most avs-artist don't want their prests to be used to earn money. And secondly because there will always be some people telling you that you copied their work and therefore demanding participation in profits.
Nevertheless i think it wouldn't be a problem if a gallery showed your presets, cause then they're used the way they are intended to: as ART.
About the 3D stuff: As you said, ther is a differnece between avs- and the "real-life"-mathematics. So i have translation problems, sometimes (like i have here in the forums now and again). I'd really like to play around with some 3D-Software (think i've got a simple one with my graphics-card) but unfortunately i've got that slight lack of time.. it feel like a vicious circle. Luckily there will be two free weeks after christmas, perhaps i'll finish my first pack then...
Nolita
28th November 2004 01:32 UTC
Don't feel bad about not having enough time to spend with the computer and AVS. It just means you have a life outside of VR and that's a good thing:).
About the idea, I wasn't meaning my presets, I'm still learning. I just meant for somebody with a great eye, who has a great deal of experience. Of course the irony of copying is anyone who has come to this since Pak-9 came out with his manual, might easily be accused of copying. It's silly if you ask me. I have this aquaintance who uses Photoshop to make the most amazing pictures. He doesn't really paint in the strictest sense, but uses tons of different little Photoshop tricks. Nobody would dream of accusing him of copying, you see his stuff and you know it's his right away(he has his own style). But most of what he uses are simple tools included in the software, they make circular selections, and he changes hues and tones and what have you, and everything is from scratch. A nit-picky person would say he's not an artist because he doesn't paint each line by hand.
What I mean is, Pak-9, or even looking at somebody else's code, can teach you how to make a square, or a plane. It can teach you how to make a circle or an oval. I managed to make a triangle in the process of learning to make a rectangle. Those are elements to me.
If you get really old school/cheap and open MSpaint(comes with windows of course), there's shapes included, filled and hollow. When I first got into computers I used to take those simple included shapes and make all sorts of pictures, I made pictures of martinis and shakers with stars(for wallpaper), and palm trees swaying in the breeze, in front of sunsets. All I used was the shapes and lines tools included in the world's cheapest/simplest graphics app. When I was a little kid, and the Apple 2 computers were in every school and computer lab was a course we took(and our parents couldn't begin to wrap their brains around it), we had to learn how to use an application called Logo. The teacher made us pay attention, one series of commands drew a line, another series of commands drew a square, yet another series of commands drew a circle(sound familiar?), and still another series of commands stamped a premade stamp(like rubber stamps really) onto the screen. We drew our own pictures and learned commands for moving them around the screen(draw a bumble bee and make it fly:)). It was fun, the teacher tought us how to make these simple shapes and elements of shapes, but we each made our own art with those elements.
An architect designs a skyscraper(like the Twin Towers), then another architect designs a skyscraper(like the Petronas Towers in Malaysia). The first skyscraper has walls and windows, so does the second, do we then accuse the second architect of copying the first(hey maybe was the same architect, as I'm not well versed in architecture).
My point is, we need a system set up, wherein certain things like basic shapes and lines are copy-free. There are only so many ways to make a circle, a square, a line, or a triangle. It's what you do with them that makes the difference. I think it needs to be done, because all this accusing people of copying is really cruel. I'm an adult now. I still get irritated, but don't bruise as easily as I once did. For some reason I imagine a kid, maybe 12 years old, at their computer, learning(learning is allways good, I think). And they maybe use some of what they learned from Pak-9's tutorial, and some of what they learned by taking apart some of let's say, El-vis' code. Still what they make is all their own. Is it really fair to accuse them of cheating, copying, or stealing, when what they are making with what they've learned and or found, is completely original, all their own, and nothing the original authors of some of the code would even have thought of? Wouldn't you think it could stifle their creativity, and yes stifle their learning process?
I've been making bitmaps lately, so far I have some shaded roses(black and white/greyscale of course). If I include them in some pack, and somebody uses them in a preset, but it looks nothing like what I would ever do with them, are they stealing my bitmaps? I think not. They are using what I freely decided to give away.
^..^
28th November 2004 03:03 UTC
I think we've got absolutely the same opinion on this one.
What i meant was, that it might be possible to offend or annoy someone, if you commercialize a preset that will remind him on his own stuff. There are always some dumb spoilsports out.
However, i also started all "computer-art" with MSPaint as a child (it was not really art, but funny ;)), and still use it today sometimes. Recently i was playing around with mouse/kb input and finally made this "tribute-preset" (to remind of those lucky days). It's not completely perfect -because of my well-known time problem- but it does what i wanted it to do:
Nolita
28th November 2004 03:27 UTC
Hee,
This is so funny. I love paint_a_picture. I could totally see doodlers downloading it for themselves, and parents downloading it for their children.
What's funny, is I'm toying with an incredibly similair idea, and thought the concept would get laughed at. Mine would be a Lite-Brite preset. Remember those? Little colored bits of plastic that when placed on the included 'boards' looked like you were painting pictures with Christmas tree lights. I spent hours playing with mine when I was little. So there would be a little area that looks like a tray, and you could click to change colors but you would place the 'Lite-Brite' pieces to make pictures. Anyhow, you more or less allready made it:) so I hope you feel really good about this.
It's fun. I especially like how the airbrush reminds me of sidewalk chalk, another childhood favorite:)
MaTTFURY
28th November 2004 04:58 UTC
hey thats cool! i love it... except i had to drag over the options i want to choose :(
Nolita
28th November 2004 05:29 UTC
comments, read the comments.
MaTTFURY
28th November 2004 06:52 UTC
its a habit ill have to get into ... :P
^..^
28th November 2004 12:21 UTC
im pleased that you like it, and sorry that i anticipated your idea. ;)
But in my eyes it has still some defects (for example: if you draw a line with the "balls-pen" you get those nasty gaps if you make quick movements). Perhaps i'll find time to bugfix this one or add new functions. btw feel free to add new stuff yourself if you want. Consider this one as an "open-source" preset. Will surely be funny to see what this one becomes :D
Originally posted by Nolita
What's funny, is I'm toying with an incredibly similair idea, and thought the concept would get laughed at.
I love to play around like this too. And if there's anyone thinking this kind of preset is ridiculous, well.. then it's a pitty for their boring lifes. :p
And MATT, excuse my question, but did you ever cast your eyes on the code of a preset? Do you know the "AVS Editor" at all? Cause in at least 99.999% of all presets the very first item is the misc/comment thing. However, you should also be able to take control over the "programm" by clicking on the accompanying text.
mysterious_w
28th November 2004 14:09 UTC
Very nice, like the different brush styles. If you mange to put in a proper colour picker (with funky colours as an option), it would be excellent
^..^
28th November 2004 14:25 UTC
That's one of the aspects im not satisfied with. Still got problems with drawing a color-spectrum. If anyone could help:
http://forums.winamp.com/showthread....hreadid=200367
Nolita
29th November 2004 03:05 UTC
I don't know ^..^, I think it's almost a grey area, somewhere between a preset and a plugin. I noticed the spacing issue, but thought it was what you wanted(like something fun, don't know why). As for picking specific colors, I think that could be done(I'm not sure of how it would be coded though). Maybe you could check out some of those open source freeware apps that are just super simple doodle pads(later when you have time of course).
Once I'm better at this whole coding thing(I don't know 5 or 10 years from now?) I'm going to have a go at making an anim8or to avs plugin. Anim8or is written in one of the c languages ++ I think. It allows you to export models as c code. I think it's very possible to make it so that a complex shape(such as a humanoid, or plant) can be sent from anim8or to AVS. I need to figure out how the deformer tools work(I mean what tells them to do what in the language they're authored in). I think anim8or would be the best bet, because there's allready a large and active anim8or community(who I think would enjoy incorporating their models into winamp visualizations), and also because it's author invites people to use the program freely, write tools for it, and also incorporate the app into other applications(he's just very passionate about 3D modelling and animation, not super greedy, it's his labor of love, sound familliar?).
I'm off to click your link.:)
^..^
29th November 2004 09:09 UTC
yeah, it's all just a hobby, right? If there would be a way to get models from a 3D-animation programm to avs, it would be a great advantage, cause i think this will keep things quite easy, so that more (dumb) people (like me) will be able to 3D-things in avs). ;)
I've also got vague idea how to code this "color selction". But first i'm going to need a working color-spectrum. I was asking for a solution in that other thread, cause sometimes i have a great idea but finish up a blind alley.
Hopefully that will change (as you said in 5-10 years, at the latest)
MaTTFURY
2nd December 2004 02:14 UTC
ur just lazy though!!!!
Nolita
2nd December 2004 03:36 UTC
Oh, no! I'm not lazy. I'm just not a genius like you.
Originally posted by PAK-9
I'm sure loops and megabuf is part of my guide isnt it? You're right, sorry. I had in mind that i worked on all chapters of your guide. But actually i skipped some parts.
My fault... ;)
|