Hi, I think the rasterizer would be really interesting, since it would also probably be based on opengl and much faster than re-rendering the scene? if a widget system could be implemented for 2d views(image editor, sequencer), it could be incredibly usefull, since curve-based matte editing could possibly happen in those views instead of 3d view and the workflow would be much more natural and expectable. This would be beneficial generally for parameter editing in node editing and sequencer. By widgets I mean basically curves/rectangles/lines/points in the views, something like this: http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=10388 (from this addon work http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?185423-Stereo-Camera-Python-Script-for-Blender-2.5)
As a long time user and occasional developer, I don't think quadranculation is such an essential feature, even in 3d coat where its done really well the results are relatively hard to tweak and some kind of advanced retopo system might be more powerful for production. Besides that, there are probably some of this years GSOC proposals going in this direction ? these are of course my personal preferences, but since you were asking... ;) Vilem > ------------ Původní zpráva ------------ > Od: pete larabell <xgl.asyl...@gmail.com> > Předmět: [Bf-committers] Geometry in Compositor or Quadrangulation??? > Datum: 10.4.2011 22:17:16 > ---------------------------------------- > Hey all, > > I am planning on building a system (initial intent is for double edge > matte comp. node) that will rasterize any 3d object in the scene into > a 2d mask in the compositor. I know that is the entire purpose of ID > Mask and render layers, but I'm specifically referring to the ability > to rasterize the off-screen portions for the feathering/gradient > calculations needs to correctly implement a double edged matte/mask. > > I am also going to implement the greedy mixed integer quadrangulator. > > Now, what I'd like to ask is: > > Given that it would probably not be best to try two additions at the > same time... which one is is more desired in blender first? > > I suppose I should maybe be asking blender USERS rather than just > coders, but oh well :) > > Is there one of these two that more people would like to see??? > > As a note: the reason I ask is simple; I know that more people *want* > the quadrangulator, but the GMIQ will also take longer to implement > than the object rasterizer. > > Anyway, I'd be interested to hear the thoughts of others before I get > too deep into either one. > > Cheers! > Peter > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > > > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
