On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 09:33:01PM +0200, Patrick Fehr wrote: > Indeed, your idea is nice, but that's definitely too much work for me at the > moment. > But just out of curiosity: How could you do the "almost realtime" animation? > eg. updated all 2 seconds but in the meantime fading from one picture to > another, so you don't have to heat your cpu up to death. > And how would you realise that in gimp? Can't really imagine, how you make > the > connection between gimp-pictures and the animated daylight accurate > background.
If you look closely at the animations, you see it is build up of several layers that move at different speeds. Also weather changes often, but not really every 2 seconds. a 30 minute or even 1 hour time in between should be enough. You could also build a database of different pictures and work from that, wich will be less CPU intensive and also less correct. So what you do is have a mountain sight, a hill sight and a tree sight going round and round in different speeds and you have movement. Classic animation trick they use in cartoons. > > An other way would be just to connect a webcam. Ain't it crazy that just > > looking outside is not really an option for the true nerd? > > Well I thought about that too, but that would involve eye- or even > head-movement, and I don't want to exhaust my body :) Also you do not want that big yellow thing that is named after a software company shining in your screens. houghi -- Quote correct (NL) http://www.briachons.org/art/quote/ Zitiere richtig (DE) http://www.afaik.de/usenet/faq/zitieren Quote correctly (EN) http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
