[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu3dkit-discuss] Advanced Rendering Interface
From: |
Philippe C . D . Robert |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu3dkit-discuss] Advanced Rendering Interface |
Date: |
Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:18:33 +0100 |
Hi,
On Wednesday, December 25, 2002, at 11:34 Uhr, Gerard Iglesias wrote:
I am thinking of using a RenderMan like API which is used in the
3DKit's RenderKit as "common language". Developers would have to use
this API when working with the 3DKit. Internally the rendering is
done using so called backend renderers (see previous discussions)
which provide the concrete implementation of the rendering API. This
implementation can be done using whatever technology, ie. OpenGL,
scanline rendering, raytracing and so on.
OK you want to make a new QuickRenderman implementation, not a bad
idea, in fact maybe it is a real good idea and make sense on the Mac
platform ;)
I am not sure if a pure QRM implementation would be worth it, but I
have to look more into this... anyway, the most interesting part would
probably be the RenderMan shader language.
I can say only that we have to decide the precise target of the
toolkit, if it is research and experimentation then we need to publish
the two behaviors....
I agree. As for me I am mostly interested in doing research in the
fields of advanced rendering techniques and related, geometrical data
representation.
Well, ok maybe if people want to make new stuff very powerful, i.e.
access to the low level, they will need to expand the 3DKit by
programming in C/ObjC/OpenGL, maybe ?
This is my idea as well - to make the kit be a foundation for 3D
graphics which can easily be customised for personal needs. Thus I also
decided to remove some functionality found in the old 3.x 3DKit as it
can easily be integrated on top of the core 3DKit (ie. LOD groups, 3D
sound rendering, switch groups, ...).
Then we kind of share this dream...:-) My focus is currently not so
much in modeling though, but more in advanced graphics research. But
both is required for achieving the dream.
Fine, Ok I will not have the time to write a new Maya app in my spare
time ;)
You have some spare time? Where did you get this from...:-)
In the same field, I wonder if it would be interesting to put the math
algorithms we can find in '3D Game Engine Design' in the GeometryKit ?
If it is additional stuff, yes why not - esp. having more physics
functionality would be cool! As for the current C implementation, I
think it is quite well optimised, but then there are always ways to
improve...
-Phil
--
Philippe C.D. Robert
http://www.nice.ch/~phip