On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 5:06 AM, mhampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are a number of things I am sort of working on but I lack the > time to do them in the near future. > > 1) Better triangulations for many-vertex faces. You either have to > work around the current behavior of indexed_face_set or change it. I > have been trying to do the former in polyhedra.py, since then it only > impacts things in that module, but my current efforts are kind of > sad. That's why .render_solid() is commented out in groebner_fan > right now. My current effort tries to get a triangulation from random > lifting but I must be doing something stupid since it fails sometimes > on pretty small faces.
Could you explain what "random lifting" is? > 1b) A 3D polygon command. This could easily be built off of the > polyhedra code if the triangulation there was fixed. Could you clarify what is broken? I didn't know that triangulation is broken. > > 2) Animations. I'm not sure how to really fix this. For small, > simple animations its OK to use convert and get an animated gif, but > that starts getting awkward quickly. I have been playing with using > Blender to get nice movies of animations (e.g. compressed jpeg avi). > It would be very cool to have a Blender spkg, although it would be > huge. But having an experimental one would be a big step forward; > maybe we could figure out how to carve off the pieces we needed. I definitely don't want to maintain such an spkg, especially since if blender is any good as a project (and it is!) then one should be able to easily install it on ones computer independent of Sage. Making an spkg should only be needed if we need to binary link Sage to a program, hence build it with special options, or the program has a relatively small user base and is hard to install (e.g., polymake, etc.). For this application, can't one just write some data to a file and run blender as a subprocess. Another way to make animation for a web browser would be to use javascript, though the timing might look jerky. Another possibility is flash. > 3) Color functions for 3D plots. I should have put this first since I > miss it in both teaching and research and it probably isn't too hard > to do. Basic examples of what mathematica can do in this regard are > towards the end of: > http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/tutorial/DensityAndContourPlots.html > ...not that its a paragon of user friendliness, but just to clarify > what I mean. The plot3d(..., adaptive=True) puts colors in the plots, so looking at the code might provide a useful hint. > > 4) Getting image maps working better with tachyon. Last I knew these > were sort of broken and used a somewhat unusual file format (ppm?). > It would be nice to have those working better. That's a great suggestion. Can jmol also do image texture maps? > > Hmmm...I know I have others but those are what I think of first. > > Cheers, > Marshall Hampton > > On Aug 27, 10:49 pm, "Arnaud Bergeron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> There is a strong possibility that for the next semester I will be >> working on the graphics area of sage. I would working more on the >> visible side than the innards but that does not mean I will not touch >> the innards if need be. >> >> Currently I have these items that I think need work / I would like to work on >> >> - better implicit plot >> - volumetric rendering (like a contour plot, but in 3D) >> >> If you have any area involving graphics (that includes animations) or >> visualisation that you would like someone to work on, feel free to >> chime up. I need more items to work on anyway. >> >> Arnaud > > > -- William Stein Associate Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
