Re: [Bf-committers] New Double Edge Matte compositor node...
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, pete larabell xgl.asyl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all... Just a quick update on the progress of this node. After a few optimizations it is performing significantly better. The average speed increase is upwards of 50x. I will have another build on graphicall.org soon. Cheers. On 4/1/11, Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com zan...@gmail.com wrote: Oh yeah! it's coming along :D For those of you who don't get it this is a double edge matte approach!! :D Wow. Amazing stuff Pete! Daniel, were you ever able to hook the RotoBezier into Auto Key mode? Fantastic work folks. T ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] [Bf-blender-cvs] SVN commit: /data/svn/bf-blender [35967] branches/bmesh/blender/source/ blender: =bmesh=
Selon Joseph Eagar joe...@gmail.com: Revision: 35967 http://projects.blender.org/scm/viewvc.php?view=revroot=bf-blenderrevision=35967 Author: joeedh Date: 2011-04-03 00:25:01 + (Sun, 03 Apr 2011) Log Message: --- =bmesh= Implemented the solidify modifier (but not the editmode tool, yet). Modified Paths: -- ... branches/bmesh/blender/source/blender/modifiers/intern/MOD_solidify.c hi, the branch build on win32 but the use of the solidify modifier freezes blender with this error : Memoryblock free : error in source\blender\modifier\intern\MOD_solidify.c on line 674: attempt to free NULL pointer jms ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Adding material slot behaviour - proposal
Hi, I'm fine with this too; there's a New button anyway for empty slots. Not much time now, can someone track down who added it and verify with the dev? (maybe i did even ;) -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.orgwww.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands On 2 Apr, 2011, at 21:10, Thomas Dinges wrote: +1 for that too, empty slot or link Am 02.04.2011 20:44, schrieb Damir Prebeg: I also find this automatic material creation very annoying. Thumbs up for empty slot or link to existing mat. ___ 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 ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] Experimental pydna
Hi all, Last september, Revision 31766, Campbell added this: --- ./intern/tools/pydna.py Experimental module (for developers only), exposes DNA data via python uses no blender/python modules, pure python + autogenerated ctypes api. --- Since it allows full Blender data access, scripters are using it to cover up for missing RNA parts. A 2nd Life developer in IRC asked if we could enable it on the 2.57 release, by ensuring it works for Windows as well (needs a small #ifdef DNA hack). My suggestion would be to really not do this, it doesn't belong in releases. By fixing this backdoor to work in all released binaries we only will regret it later on. We don't have our RNA project for a good reason... Because 2nd Life really needs image access, I advised them to provide temporarily a special build for their users to survive the period until we have our own decent working RNA level image access. Please advise if that's acceptable? -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.orgwww.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] GSoC 2011 Proposal
Hi! I've prepared and submitted my project proposal for Blender in GSoC melange page. Please have a look and feel free to comment on anything. I need as much feedback as possible. http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/review/google/gsoc2011/sukhitha/1 Thanks! Cheers, phabtar -- Sukhitha Jayathilake, Undergraduate, Computer Science and Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Sri lanka. ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Experimental pydna
Plus it doesn't work on windows which would frustrate people developing on linux and trying to release their script to the public. On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote: Hi all, Last september, Revision 31766, Campbell added this: --- ./intern/tools/pydna.py Experimental module (for developers only), exposes DNA data via python uses no blender/python modules, pure python + autogenerated ctypes api. --- Since it allows full Blender data access, scripters are using it to cover up for missing RNA parts. A 2nd Life developer in IRC asked if we could enable it on the 2.57 release, by ensuring it works for Windows as well (needs a small #ifdef DNA hack). My suggestion would be to really not do this, it doesn't belong in releases. By fixing this backdoor to work in all released binaries we only will regret it later on. We don't have our RNA project for a good reason... Because 2nd Life really needs image access, I advised them to provide temporarily a special build for their users to survive the period until we have our own decent working RNA level image access. Please advise if that's acceptable? -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.org www.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Experimental pydna
Dan, Ton mentioned the fix that makes it work for Windows. What is the problem of adding such feature in 2.57, if it is marked clearly as experimental/temporary fix? When is a permanent fix ready? On Sunday, 3 April 2011, Dan Eicher d...@trollwerks.org wrote: Plus it doesn't work on windows which would frustrate people developing on linux and trying to release their script to the public. On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote: Hi all, Last september, Revision 31766, Campbell added this: --- ./intern/tools/pydna.py Experimental module (for developers only), exposes DNA data via python uses no blender/python modules, pure python + autogenerated ctypes api. --- Since it allows full Blender data access, scripters are using it to cover up for missing RNA parts. A 2nd Life developer in IRC asked if we could enable it on the 2.57 release, by ensuring it works for Windows as well (needs a small #ifdef DNA hack). My suggestion would be to really not do this, it doesn't belong in releases. By fixing this backdoor to work in all released binaries we only will regret it later on. We don't have our RNA project for a good reason... Because 2nd Life really needs image access, I advised them to provide temporarily a special build for their users to survive the period until we have our own decent working RNA level image access. Please advise if that's acceptable? -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.org www.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands ___ 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 ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] Compile error with Bullet (Linux/CMake)
Hi, I'm getting this error compiling blender: http://www.pasteall.org/20499 on Linux 32bit/CMake. (the problem of course goes away if I use: WITH_BULLET OFF) Regards, Luca _ http://www.mindrones.com ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Experimental pydna
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Erwin Coumans erwin.coum...@gmail.com wrote: Dan, Ton mentioned the fix that makes it work for Windows. Doh, replied before the coffee fully kicked in... What is the problem of adding such feature in 2.57, if it is marked clearly as experimental/temporary fix? When is a permanent fix ready? I still don't understand why having no solution is better than a 'too slow' solution? Dan ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Experimental pydna
Hi, I've added simple Image.pixels access in svn now. It's not the most efficient implementation but it should work, just be sure to copy out all in the pixels into a list in one go, instead of accessing the pixels one by one. All this DNA fiddling is much too complicated.. Brecht. On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Domino Marama dom...@dominodesigns.info wrote: On Sun, 2011-04-03 at 15:32 +0200, Ton Roosendaal wrote: Hi all, Last september, Revision 31766, Campbell added this: --- ./intern/tools/pydna.py Experimental module (for developers only), exposes DNA data via python uses no blender/python modules, pure python + autogenerated ctypes api. --- Since it allows full Blender data access, scripters are using it to cover up for missing RNA parts. A 2nd Life developer in IRC asked if we could enable it on the 2.57 release, by ensuring it works for Windows as well (needs a small #ifdef DNA hack). The problem is caused by Windows linker optimising away unreferenced globals. http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/forums/en-US/vclanguage/thread/2aa2e1b7-6677-4986-99cc-62f463c94ef3 What the 'hack' does is make sure the globals used by pydna aren't removed by the windows linker. As far as I know the standard behaviour on other platforms is to export the symbols for these globals not remove them. My suggestion would be to really not do this, it doesn't belong in releases. By fixing this backdoor to work in all released binaries we only will regret it later on. We don't have our RNA project for a good reason... I'm not sure I understand why there may be regrets for enabling this on all platforms. It opens up a workflow where python coders can prototype features that wouldn't be possible otherwise. This helps show what is needed for the official API. Because 2nd Life really needs image access, I advised them to provide temporarily a special build for their users to survive the period until we have our own decent working RNA level image access. Please advise if that's acceptable? The sculpt map format in Second Life is such an oddball, that there's really no workaround other than having pixel read and write functions. Currently pydna is our only option for that. Due to the image support in Second Life, there's legacy content out there in bmp, tga and png formats. Besides the actual sculpt maps, I also generate UV layout guides so being able to see the image in Blender is also a necessary feature. Is the plan to disable pydna on Linux and Mac then? We could probably manage if we only have to do Windows builds, but neither myself, who is developing the scripts, or Gaia, who tests on Windows and does the user support, have access to Macs. Hopefully that covers the points Gaia couldn't in IRC :) Best Wishes, Domino ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] .blend magic number MIME type
Hi, On 03/17/2011 11:23 AM, j.bak...@atmind.nl wrote: see http://www.blender.org/development/architecture/blender-file-format/ if it can be of help, please also have a look in the source code at: https://svn.blender.org/svnroot/bf-blender/trunk/blender/doc/blender_file_format/ There you can find a script from Jeroen to generate a .blend file and to inspect it, to list all the structures inside of it; see the readme at https://svn.blender.org/svnroot/bf-blender/trunk/blender/doc/blender_file_format/README Regards, Luca _ http://www.mindrones.com ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Compile error with Bullet (Linux/CMake)
it sound like you are using an outdated extern/bullet2, or old copied header files. can you checkout a fresh source tree in a separate location? Thanks, Erwin On Apr 3, 2011, at 8:59 AM, mindrones mindro...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I'm getting this error compiling blender: http://www.pasteall.org/20499 on Linux 32bit/CMake. (the problem of course goes away if I use: WITH_BULLET OFF) Regards, Luca _ http://www.mindrones.com ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Adding material slot behaviour - proposal
Thanks for the quick fix blendix! Jonathan Williamson Instructor - http://www.blendercookie.com Personal Trainer - http://www.mavenseed.com Portfolio - http://www.jw3d.com On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 6:18 AM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote: Hi, I'm fine with this too; there's a New button anyway for empty slots. Not much time now, can someone track down who added it and verify with the dev? (maybe i did even ;) -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.orgwww.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands On 2 Apr, 2011, at 21:10, Thomas Dinges wrote: +1 for that too, empty slot or link Am 02.04.2011 20:44, schrieb Damir Prebeg: I also find this automatic material creation very annoying. Thumbs up for empty slot or link to existing mat. ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] New Double Edge Matte compositor node...
New version now available, major speed improvements (on order of 50x to 100x xD ). http://graphicall.org/builds/builds/showbuild.php?action=showid=1818 Cheers! Pete On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Troy Sobotka troy.sobo...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 8:58 AM, pete larabell xgl.asyl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all... Just a quick update on the progress of this node. After a few optimizations it is performing significantly better. The average speed increase is upwards of 50x. I will have another build on graphicall.org soon. Cheers. On 4/1/11, Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com zan...@gmail.com wrote: Oh yeah! it's coming along :D For those of you who don't get it this is a double edge matte approach!! :D Wow. Amazing stuff Pete! Daniel, were you ever able to hook the RotoBezier into Auto Key mode? Fantastic work folks. T ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Blender IRC meeting
Hi all, There's two add-ons candidate to be included for 2.47 (bevel, looptools). Campbell would check on it, if that fits well we better have it in RC2 though. Will wait for his advice before calling the next build. -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.orgwww.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands On 3 Apr, 2011, at 18:33, Ton Roosendaal wrote: Hi all, 1) 2.57 - Startup.blend changes: discussed were two defaults: Continuous grab: disable as default factory setting. Reasoning: it's jerky on slow redraws, on fast mouse moves it's losing offset, on small areas annoying, on headers annoying too (move up or down). People who like it or already use if have in their startup anyway, but the regular bugreports about it show it's not a good default. Open Image thumbnails for image browse: currently still disabled. It will crash Blender on any corrupt file in a directory, without feedback what's wrong. Andrea would like to see it default though, several bugs have been fixed here and it's more stable than in 2.56. - Startup issue: when we move to 2.57, the startup.blend, scripts and other config files are not read. Users have to manually copy it over... can we find a nice way to help migrating it? For example option in the splash to allow this... - Meeting agreed on doing another RC (2). We can do final release within a week then. Ton will send builders official request later today. - Jens Verwiebe is also available for OSX test builds, to assist Damien. 2) other projects - The new buildbot progresses well, for Linux it now even builds binaries similar to releases. Brecht will help getting a system in Blender Institute to make builds. http://builder.blender.org/ 3) GSoC Students can still apply until friday April 8, 1900 UTC. Don't wait too long! -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.org www.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Blender IRC meeting
2.47 :-) On 3 April 2011 20:22, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote: Hi all, There's two add-ons candidate to be included for 2.47 (bevel, looptools). Campbell would check on it, if that fits well we better have it in RC2 though. Will wait for his advice before calling the next build. -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.org www.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands On 3 Apr, 2011, at 18:33, Ton Roosendaal wrote: Hi all, 1) 2.57 - Startup.blend changes: discussed were two defaults: Continuous grab: disable as default factory setting. Reasoning: it's jerky on slow redraws, on fast mouse moves it's losing offset, on small areas annoying, on headers annoying too (move up or down). People who like it or already use if have in their startup anyway, but the regular bugreports about it show it's not a good default. Open Image thumbnails for image browse: currently still disabled. It will crash Blender on any corrupt file in a directory, without feedback what's wrong. Andrea would like to see it default though, several bugs have been fixed here and it's more stable than in 2.56. - Startup issue: when we move to 2.57, the startup.blend, scripts and other config files are not read. Users have to manually copy it over... can we find a nice way to help migrating it? For example option in the splash to allow this... - Meeting agreed on doing another RC (2). We can do final release within a week then. Ton will send builders official request later today. - Jens Verwiebe is also available for OSX test builds, to assist Damien. 2) other projects - The new buildbot progresses well, for Linux it now even builds binaries similar to releases. Brecht will help getting a system in Blender Institute to make builds. http://builder.blender.org/ 3) GSoC Students can still apply until friday April 8, 1900 UTC. Don't wait too long! -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.org www.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands ___ 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 ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] [Bf-blender-cvs] SVN commit: /data/svn/bf-blender [35967] branches/bmesh/blender/source/ blender: =bmesh=
Hi, I can confirm this problem on Linux (Ubuntu 32bit) too. Davis On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 10:56 AM, jmso...@free.fr wrote: Selon Joseph Eagar joe...@gmail.com: Revision: 35967 http://projects.blender.org/scm/viewvc.php?view=revroot=bf-blenderrevision=35967 Author: joeedh Date: 2011-04-03 00:25:01 + (Sun, 03 Apr 2011) Log Message: --- =bmesh= Implemented the solidify modifier (but not the editmode tool, yet). Modified Paths: -- ... branches/bmesh/blender/source/blender/modifiers/intern/MOD_solidify.c hi, the branch build on win32 but the use of the solidify modifier freezes blender with this error : Memoryblock free : error in source\blender\modifier\intern\MOD_solidify.c on line 674: attempt to free NULL pointer jms ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Blender IRC meeting
On start.blend: 1) Addons: 1.1) Copy Attributes Menu - not much for the object properties, but more for the Tex Face copy options. If people are against the Ctrl+C menu by default we should at least (imho) to branch it out and take the TexFace copy out of the script. I do want to remove TexFace to 2.58, but in the mean time we need a workflow to copy face options over and the addon is what we have afaik. 1.2) Export Blender Player 2) User Preferences: 2.1) Can we have Emulate 3 Button Mouse on by default? Not only it makes it work like In 2.49, but also makes people with no scrollwheel happy (e.g. OSX and mousepad in laptops) and people that doesn't like to press the MMB all the time (e.g. me ;) 2.2) Can Tab as Spaces be off by default? A polemic one. I know why we have it on (pep8 *argh*), but really? I still think that a Text Editor shouldn't assume we want to add spaces instead of tabs. Sincerely, Dalai (too bad the meetings are at 7am local time :/ otherwise I would bring those points there) 2011/4/3 Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org: Hi all, There's two add-ons candidate to be included for 2.47 (bevel, looptools). Campbell would check on it, if that fits well we better have it in RC2 though. Will wait for his advice before calling the next build. -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.org www.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands On 3 Apr, 2011, at 18:33, Ton Roosendaal wrote: Hi all, 1) 2.57 - Startup.blend changes: discussed were two defaults: Continuous grab: disable as default factory setting. Reasoning: it's jerky on slow redraws, on fast mouse moves it's losing offset, on small areas annoying, on headers annoying too (move up or down). People who like it or already use if have in their startup anyway, but the regular bugreports about it show it's not a good default. Open Image thumbnails for image browse: currently still disabled. It will crash Blender on any corrupt file in a directory, without feedback what's wrong. Andrea would like to see it default though, several bugs have been fixed here and it's more stable than in 2.56. - Startup issue: when we move to 2.57, the startup.blend, scripts and other config files are not read. Users have to manually copy it over... can we find a nice way to help migrating it? For example option in the splash to allow this... - Meeting agreed on doing another RC (2). We can do final release within a week then. Ton will send builders official request later today. - Jens Verwiebe is also available for OSX test builds, to assist Damien. 2) other projects - The new buildbot progresses well, for Linux it now even builds binaries similar to releases. Brecht will help getting a system in Blender Institute to make builds. http://builder.blender.org/ 3) GSoC Students can still apply until friday April 8, 1900 UTC. Don't wait too long! -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.org www.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands ___ 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 ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] Patch for Double Edge Matte compositor node.
http://projects.blender.org/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=26762group_id=9atid=127 Description and some screens available on user page: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Xgl_asyliax .blend files available: http://www.pasteall.org/blend/5907 http://www.pasteall.org/blend/5906 ubuntu 32bit build available: http://www.graphicall.org/builds/builds/showbuild.php?action=showid=1818 cheers! Pete ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Pen tool would be a great addition! I surely hope this proposal gets accepted! On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Alice Li li.ali...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, My name is Alice Li, I'm a 3rd year student majoring in Computer Science at the University of Toronto and I'm interested in participating in GSoC 2011. I have only recently discovered my passion for computer science (3 years ago) and have not contributed anything to the open source community yet, but I would really be grateful for the chance to start with GSoC. I have been using Blender for 3 months now and I hope to contribute to the retopology tools, specifically: - *Pen tool* to quickly draw polygons without the need to fill faces manually - *Paint Stroke tool* for adding faces based on intersecting strokes I chose these because I personally would find these tools very useful as I found it a little tedious to manually create faces. As well, I have some experience with interpolation and numerical integration that I have learned in a numerical methods course. I have programmed in Python for 3 years now, Java and C for 2 years now. I would appreciate it if any of you could give me some pointers as to which areas of the documentation/api to look at to help me get started with my proposal. I also want to get as much information as possible so I can create a very reasonable timeline and to know if I may be overshooting or undershooting with my proposal ideas. Thanks very much in advance, Alice ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Alice, I am not a developer and so I cannot help with the documentation or API but I did want to say that if you need any feedback during the project on the tool behavior, workflow, etc then let me know. I have spent a significant amount of time with the current retopology tools and tested out several other applications retopology tools. As a modeler and the person that suggested the Pen and Stroke tools as ideas I'm really excited to see you interested in picking this one. Let me know if I can help in any way. Jonathan Williamson Instructor - http://www.blendercookie.com Personal Trainer - http://www.mavenseed.com Portfolio - http://www.jw3d.com On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 12:11 PM, pete larabell xgl.asyl...@gmail.comwrote: Pen tool would be a great addition! I surely hope this proposal gets accepted! On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Alice Li li.ali...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, My name is Alice Li, I'm a 3rd year student majoring in Computer Science at the University of Toronto and I'm interested in participating in GSoC 2011. I have only recently discovered my passion for computer science (3 years ago) and have not contributed anything to the open source community yet, but I would really be grateful for the chance to start with GSoC. I have been using Blender for 3 months now and I hope to contribute to the retopology tools, specifically: - *Pen tool* to quickly draw polygons without the need to fill faces manually - *Paint Stroke tool* for adding faces based on intersecting strokes I chose these because I personally would find these tools very useful as I found it a little tedious to manually create faces. As well, I have some experience with interpolation and numerical integration that I have learned in a numerical methods course. I have programmed in Python for 3 years now, Java and C for 2 years now. I would appreciate it if any of you could give me some pointers as to which areas of the documentation/api to look at to help me get started with my proposal. I also want to get as much information as possible so I can create a very reasonable timeline and to know if I may be overshooting or undershooting with my proposal ideas. Thanks very much in advance, Alice ___ 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 ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Alice, - *Pen tool* to quickly draw polygons without the need to fill faces manually - *Paint Stroke tool* for adding faces based on intersecting strokes from your description a recent addition to Blender might be of some help see http://www.blendernation.com/2011/03/23/quad-dominant-remeshing-development/ (also http://vimeo.com/21096739 ) it has a video and code ( patch ). also you might be interested to look at previous year submission https://svn.blender.org/svnroot/bf-blender/branches/soc-2010-rohith291991 -code http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Rohith291991/Gsoc2010/Proposal - proposal patch http://code.google.com/p/google-summer-of-code-2010-blender/downloads/detail?name=Rohith_BV.tar.gz ( it effectively gives https://svn.blender.org/svnroot/bf-blender/branches/soc-2010-rohith291991 - but might give idea what was changed ) it also can be used ( and updated ) and fitted with your interface part. also, I can think to use for such purpose http://tetgen.berlios.de/ code ( the code can be used with Blender and even accordingly re licensed ). but be aware - that my recommendations are educated guess - and you still need to evaluate if these tools will help you to make your task completed. hope you would be ok with it before final submission date ( April 8, friday ) Regards Sergey ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Alice, I'd recommend starting with the developers quickstart guide http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:2.5/Doc/Developers_Quickstart see if you can get blender built on your platform of choice. stop by #blendercoders on irc.freenode.net if you have any difficulties. The relevant code first I'd look at this script 'surface sketching' http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?183863-Surface-Sketching-script-v0.8-Beta both of those tools are quite similar to the functionality it provides. LetterRip On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Alice Li li.ali...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, My name is Alice Li, I'm a 3rd year student majoring in Computer Science at the University of Toronto and I'm interested in participating in GSoC 2011. I have only recently discovered my passion for computer science (3 years ago) and have not contributed anything to the open source community yet, but I would really be grateful for the chance to start with GSoC. I have been using Blender for 3 months now and I hope to contribute to the retopology tools, specifically: - *Pen tool* to quickly draw polygons without the need to fill faces manually - *Paint Stroke tool* for adding faces based on intersecting strokes I chose these because I personally would find these tools very useful as I found it a little tedious to manually create faces. As well, I have some experience with interpolation and numerical integration that I have learned in a numerical methods course. I have programmed in Python for 3 years now, Java and C for 2 years now. I would appreciate it if any of you could give me some pointers as to which areas of the documentation/api to look at to help me get started with my proposal. I also want to get as much information as possible so I can create a very reasonable timeline and to know if I may be overshooting or undershooting with my proposal ideas. Thanks very much in advance, Alice ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Sergey, I don't think the quad dominant remeshing is likely to provide much similar tools or code at all. LetterRip On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: from your description a recent addition to Blender might be of some help see http://www.blendernation.com/2011/03/23/quad-dominant-remeshing-development/ ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Sergey, those papers have nothing to do with the current proposal. LetterRip On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alice ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Tim those papers have nothing to do with the current proposal. could you please elaborate? the workflow of pen is following - a shape is drawn and is filled with triangles. there could be two cases 1) just plain surface, 2) a surface in 3D in case of plain surface - it seems not of much use. in case of 3D surface one needs to 'construct' imaginary 3D object and then fill it with triangles. For these purposes there are several approaches - including tetrahedrization (tetgen) or reconstruction surface with marching cubes or similar algos ( the same goes for quad remeshing - after a 'surface' is somehow given - it can be effectivly covered with quads - dual contouring is just to fill some surface - how it is given - by sketch or mesh is a second question her ). so it might not be 3D sketching, but then - OK, still the algorithm for the proposal should be provided and be just a 'pen' proposal. Regards Sergey On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Tom M letter...@gmail.com wrote: Sergey, those papers have nothing to do with the current proposal. LetterRip On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alice ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tim those papers have nothing to do with the current proposal. could you please elaborate? the workflow of pen is following - a shape is drawn and is filled with triangles. These are 'retopology tools' the flow of the underlying surface is known and can be sampled. No inferences about the 3d location of the mesh needs to be made, also the first paper you linked was about constructing 3d from 2d from a single view. The second paper was about infering 3d form from multiple orthographic drawings. Neither of which are anything at all related to retopology tools. Also farstharys code in unlimited clay again has nothing to do with the current proposal, the methods that the faces are constructed will be an entirely different algorithm. LetterRip ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Tom These are 'retopology tools' the flow of the underlying surface is known and can be sampled. so concerning quad rmeshing - your first objection I don't think the quad dominant remeshing is likely to provide much similar tools or code at all. it is what ronih did not finish but intended to do - to sketch above mesh then to quad dominant remesh it. the approach he used - allows such features. the same goes for dual contouring - it might work not on whole mesh but will reconstruct surface on given border and given mesh. No inferences about the 3d location of the mesh needs to be made, also the first paper you linked was about constructing 3d from 2d from a single view. The second paper was about infering 3d form from multiple orthographic drawings. Neither of which are anything at all related to retopology tools. the papers are long they end up with filling the reconstructed 3D with triangles - and there is need to have algo for that in addition to quad dominant remeshing tetgen goes here. Besides it gives additional angle to view the problem Also farstharys code in unlimited clay again has nothing to do with the current proposal, the methods that the faces are constructed will be an entirely different algorithm. maybe farshary will reply ;) Regards Sergey ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Compile error with Bullet (Linux/CMake)
Hi Erwin, On 04/03/2011 06:53 PM, erwin coumans wrote: can you checkout a fresh source tree in a separate location? indeed that worked, I didn't think to do a fresh folder. Thanks! Regards, Luca _ http://www.mindrones.com ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: it is what ronih did not finish but intended to do - to sketch above mesh then to quad dominant remesh it. the approach he used - allows such features. No, quad dominant remeshish is much more specialized and uses algorithms wholly inappropriate for what this student is working on. Quad dominant remeshing might eventually use surface strokes for hinting the flow of the remeshing. However what these tools need to do is drastically simpler. the same goes for dual contouring - it might work not on whole mesh but will reconstruct surface on given border and given mesh. Dual contouring is what nick bishop (not farsthary is working on, and again completely irrelevant to the task at hand. the papers are long they end up with filling the reconstructed 3D with triangles - and there is need to have algo for that in addition to quad dominant remeshing tetgen goes here. Besides it gives additional angle to view the problem The type of filling by these algorithms is totally inappropriate for the task at hand. LetterRip ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Alice here is the latest version of the surface sketch script that I mentioned above. https://svn.blender.org/svnroot/bf-extensions/trunk/py/scripts/addons/mesh_bsurfaces.py LetterRip On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Alice Li li.ali...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, My name is Alice Li, I'm a 3rd year student majoring in Computer Science at the University of Toronto and I'm interested in participating in GSoC 2011. I have only recently discovered my passion for computer science (3 years ago) and have not contributed anything to the open source community yet, but I would really be grateful for the chance to start with GSoC. I have been using Blender for 3 months now and I hope to contribute to the retopology tools, specifically: - *Pen tool* to quickly draw polygons without the need to fill faces manually - *Paint Stroke tool* for adding faces based on intersecting strokes I chose these because I personally would find these tools very useful as I found it a little tedious to manually create faces. As well, I have some experience with interpolation and numerical integration that I have learned in a numerical methods course. I have programmed in Python for 3 years now, Java and C for 2 years now. I would appreciate it if any of you could give me some pointers as to which areas of the documentation/api to look at to help me get started with my proposal. I also want to get as much information as possible so I can create a very reasonable timeline and to know if I may be overshooting or undershooting with my proposal ideas. Thanks very much in advance, Alice ___ 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
[Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Tom No, quad dominant remeshish is much more specialized and uses algorithms wholly inappropriate for what this student is working on. so rohith was intended to use pen to outline simplified area, after he finished integration into blender, and it is inappropriate - how do you know? because your first reaction was it is wrong and you will 'press ahead' the point here - to use algorithm - and it is already integrated with Blender and can be further used ( or not ). why to use? because the algorithm is much more powerfull and can retopo quite difficult areas unlike script you promote. of cause - the trade of - how difficult is to use, but your point that it is inappriate is overstretched - the algo can be used to remesh with given quality sketched mesh.. Dual contouring is what nick bishop (not farsthary is working on, and again completely irrelevant to the task at hand. the story is - the algo is donated to Blender foundation for use, and Nick integrated the code. and sorry, I would say that I never mentioned Farshary as a author or this code, I mentioned him in relation to Unlimited Clay - ability to fill surfaces, remesh them adaptivly etc. his skills could be of some use in the regards The type of filling by these algorithms is totally inappropriate for the task at hand. I'm sorry Tom, but the algo is used just for this purpose browse at this page http://tetgen.berlios.de/features.html to Refine surface meshes Regards Sergey ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Blender IRC meeting
Raytracing Instances as default? Daniel Salazar 3Developer.com 2011/4/3 Dalai Felinto dfeli...@gmail.com: On start.blend: 1) Addons: 1.1) Copy Attributes Menu - not much for the object properties, but more for the Tex Face copy options. If people are against the Ctrl+C menu by default we should at least (imho) to branch it out and take the TexFace copy out of the script. I do want to remove TexFace to 2.58, but in the mean time we need a workflow to copy face options over and the addon is what we have afaik. 1.2) Export Blender Player 2) User Preferences: 2.1) Can we have Emulate 3 Button Mouse on by default? Not only it makes it work like In 2.49, but also makes people with no scrollwheel happy (e.g. OSX and mousepad in laptops) and people that doesn't like to press the MMB all the time (e.g. me ;) 2.2) Can Tab as Spaces be off by default? A polemic one. I know why we have it on (pep8 *argh*), but really? I still think that a Text Editor shouldn't assume we want to add spaces instead of tabs. Sincerely, Dalai (too bad the meetings are at 7am local time :/ otherwise I would bring those points there) 2011/4/3 Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org: Hi all, There's two add-ons candidate to be included for 2.47 (bevel, looptools). Campbell would check on it, if that fits well we better have it in RC2 though. Will wait for his advice before calling the next build. -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.org www.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands On 3 Apr, 2011, at 18:33, Ton Roosendaal wrote: Hi all, 1) 2.57 - Startup.blend changes: discussed were two defaults: Continuous grab: disable as default factory setting. Reasoning: it's jerky on slow redraws, on fast mouse moves it's losing offset, on small areas annoying, on headers annoying too (move up or down). People who like it or already use if have in their startup anyway, but the regular bugreports about it show it's not a good default. Open Image thumbnails for image browse: currently still disabled. It will crash Blender on any corrupt file in a directory, without feedback what's wrong. Andrea would like to see it default though, several bugs have been fixed here and it's more stable than in 2.56. - Startup issue: when we move to 2.57, the startup.blend, scripts and other config files are not read. Users have to manually copy it over... can we find a nice way to help migrating it? For example option in the splash to allow this... - Meeting agreed on doing another RC (2). We can do final release within a week then. Ton will send builders official request later today. - Jens Verwiebe is also available for OSX test builds, to assist Damien. 2) other projects - The new buildbot progresses well, for Linux it now even builds binaries similar to releases. Brecht will help getting a system in Blender Institute to make builds. http://builder.blender.org/ 3) GSoC Students can still apply until friday April 8, 1900 UTC. Don't wait too long! -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.org www.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
@pete, Jonathan, Sergey, and Letterrip: Thanks for the feedback, I really appreciate it. Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 13:07:55 -0800 From: Tom M letter...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools To: bf-blender developers bf-committers@blender.org Message-ID: BANLkTi=eGNWXaMCx-n=m9x0yvdlhh0h...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Alice here is the latest version of the surface sketch script that I mentioned above. https://svn.blender.org/svnroot/bf-extensions/trunk/py/scripts/addons/mesh_bsurfaces.py LetterRip On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Alice Li li.ali...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, My name is Alice Li, I'm a 3rd year student majoring in Computer Science at the University of Toronto and I'm interested in participating in GSoC 2011. I have only recently discovered my passion for computer science (3 years ago) and have not contributed anything to the open source community yet, but I would really be grateful for the chance to start with GSoC. I have been using Blender for 3 months now and I hope to contribute to the retopology tools, specifically: - *Pen tool* to quickly draw polygons without the need to fill faces manually - *Paint Stroke tool* for adding faces based on intersecting strokes I chose these because I personally would find these tools very useful as I found it a little tedious to manually create faces. As well, I have some experience with interpolation and numerical integration that I have learned in a numerical methods course. I have programmed in Python for 3 years now, Java and C for 2 years now. I would appreciate it if any of you could give me some pointers as to which areas of the documentation/api to look at to help me get started with my proposal. I also want to get as much information as possible so I can create a very reasonable timeline and to know if I may be overshooting or undershooting with my proposal ideas. Thanks very much in advance, Alice ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tom No, quad dominant remeshish is much more specialized and uses algorithms wholly inappropriate for what this student is working on. so rohith was intended to use pen to outline simplified area, after he finished integration into blender, and it is inappropriate - how do you know? because your first reaction was it is wrong and you will 'press ahead' I managed last years Google Summer of Code for blender, helped design many of the students proposals (including helped rohith), etc. I also am managing this years GSoC including adding the retopo proposals :) the point here - to use algorithm - and it is already integrated with Blender and can be further used ( or not ). Rohiths code can only work on extremely simple meshes because the math library he needed for accelerating the process was not integrated yet (it is something he plans to do, but he isn't done yet), there are other issues as well that make it not production ready. Even if it were production ready, the method it uses for generating the new mesh is totally inappropriate for the simple nature of the retopology tools that are for GSoC. why to use? because the algorithm is much more powerfull and can retopo quite difficult areas unlike script you promote. The script I suggested was so that the student could find where in the code to look for using the apis she will need to know. She can use the APIs in the referenced script directly if she is comfortable with python, so search the source code to find the C API that the python code in the script is calling. It was not an alogithmic reference :) of cause - the trade of - how difficult is to use, but your point that it is inappriate is overstretched - the algo can be used to remesh with given quality sketched mesh.. None of your suggested references provide algorithms for generating the mesh in an appropriate manner. They are either drastically too complicated (involving things like taking derivatives of curvature and other fun math) or way to simple (doing scan fills that result in tris or quads that will give ugly topology). LetterRip ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Tom. I managed last years Google Summer of Code for blender, helped design many of the students proposals (including helped rohith), etc. so you kind of big boss? Rohiths code can only work on extremely simple meshes because the math library he needed for accelerating the process was not integrated yet this is incorrect he used library http://openmesh.org/index.php?id=271#c2029 which is described in http://www.graphics.rwth-aachen.de/uploads/media/spm08_01.pdf the library is present in rohith patches ( and I compiled his code ) so it is integrated and has simple interface - somehow you missed it big boss, now as to 'usefulness' - it remeshes arbitrary mesh preserving features - so what is needed in the case of retopology is totally inappropriate for the simple nature of the retopology tools that are for GSoC. so to use ready code - is difficult. Or Tom - maybe you can allow a bit of creativity? that will easily pay off. maybe rohith did not finish intended feature because he tired of you? just think for a while - maybe sometimes to be more flexible pays off. None of your suggested references provide algorithms for generating the mesh in an appropriate manner. They are either drastically too complicated (involving things like taking derivatives of curvature and other fun math) or way to simple (doing scan fills that result in tris or quads that will give ugly topology). I see that you are in charge - but all mentioned approaches was like these: take arbitrary mesh and make it better. it is developed with simple interface with mesh in - mesh out. in case you can suggest any better algos - and I provided best in class of retopo algos you are welcome. Regards Sergey ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: so you kind of big boss? No, Ton is the Big Boss - I'm more of a medium boss :) Rohiths code can only work on extremely simple meshes because the math library he needed for accelerating the process was not integrated yet this is incorrect No it really is correct, me and rohith exchanged emails and chat discussions, here is a direct quote from about a month ago, QUOTE it will be really slow and will work only for fairly low poly models the reason being that I did not find a usable sparse matrix implementation END QUOTE Anywho he is currently looking for a usable sparse matrix implementation and has some bugs to fix. However it is irrelevant, since it still wouldn't be appropriate for the two tasks that the student is interested in working on (which are much simpler cases). somehow you missed it big boss, Didn't miss it - I just have more direct knowledge of what is going on. so to use ready code - is difficult. Or Tom - maybe you can allow a bit of creativity? that will easily pay off. maybe rohith did not finish intended feature because he tired of you? It is great that you wanted to help a student by providing papers, it isn't so good that you are insisting that you are correct in an insulting manner. all mentioned approaches was like these: take arbitrary mesh and make it better. it is developed with simple interface with mesh in - mesh out. The use case is entirely different. This is faster manual creation of a retopology, things are very well constrained so heavy math lifting doesn't need to be done to find what the contours of the mesh are in order to best align the edge loops. LetterRip ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:03 AM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: all mentioned approaches was like these: take arbitrary mesh and make it better. it is developed with simple interface with mesh in - mesh out. in case you can suggest any better algos - and I provided best in class of retopo algos Hi Sergey, i think there's a bit of confusion - the point for these tools is to have something manual and hands-on, so users can lay down polys exactly where they want them to be. Just like normal mesh modelling but as part of a retopo workflow. Having extra funky automatic tools can be great too, but it's a different thing. You still also need tools with manual control, even if only just to clean up problems after an automatic topology generation algorithm. So these manual tools are probably not mathematically intense, but implementing them will require good UI and workflow design, and working with artists to make them useful and efficient. So that's the purpose behind this wishlist item, to improve the manual editing tools for drawing/tweaking mesh topology manually on an existing reference surface, not to implement a fancy algorithm that guesses and generates geometry for you. Matt ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Matt, Having extra funky automatic tools can be great too, but it's a different thing. You still also need tools with manual control, even if only just to clean up problems after an automatic topology generation algorithm. So these manual tools are probably not mathematically intense, but implementing them will require good UI and workflow design, and working with artists to make them useful and efficient. the point is for use cases - if somehow user selects more that very simple area then 'general' algos would be OK. but if knowledgeable members know some approaches to handle relativly different cases with said script - and it will be useable - then OK. the problem is that - though things look simple - they anyway require quite powerful tools. and of cause - it is up to applicant and SoC leader to select approach. My series of mails were just give more outlook. even if the talk was 'hot' it might be useful after all. and no need to think that if I behave like 'young' I'm young - I have more than 10 years of graphics programming experience and lead 15 people team, it is for this reason - I'm so informal - because I try to give different outlook, and it is not I'm who will decide after all. Regards Sergey On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Matt Ebb m...@mke3.net wrote: On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:03 AM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: all mentioned approaches was like these: take arbitrary mesh and make it better. it is developed with simple interface with mesh in - mesh out. in case you can suggest any better algos - and I provided best in class of retopo algos Hi Sergey, i think there's a bit of confusion - the point for these tools is to have something manual and hands-on, so users can lay down polys exactly where they want them to be. Just like normal mesh modelling but as part of a retopo workflow. Having extra funky automatic tools can be great too, but it's a different thing. You still also need tools with manual control, even if only just to clean up problems after an automatic topology generation algorithm. So these manual tools are probably not mathematically intense, but implementing them will require good UI and workflow design, and working with artists to make them useful and efficient. So that's the purpose behind this wishlist item, to improve the manual editing tools for drawing/tweaking mesh topology manually on an existing reference surface, not to implement a fancy algorithm that guesses and generates geometry for you. Matt ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: and few words before you stated - that retopo will work on simple submeshes - correct? A common method for retopology is over sculpted meshes. You might want to retopologize creating only a small number of polys over an area with thousands, tens of thousands or more polys (Right now you can do over 40 million polys in a single mutires mesh). (with a poly budget of 150 for a simple object - 40 million/150 is about 250,000 polys per quad of your retopo mesh) maybe you have some knowledge - but it does not mean you know everything. Wasn't claiming to :) or can from out hand say that algos which are specially developed for retopo are 'unapproriate' It wasn't out of hand. I was familiar with both the target of this GSoC project, and the methods used in the projects mentioned. While it is true that there might be some use in extending the retopo tools beyond the scope that was suggested for GSoC, the original inquiry was more narrow in nature. LetterRip ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Tom, A common method for retopology is over sculpted meshes. You might want to retopologize creating only a small number of polys over an area with thousands, tens of thousands or more polys (Right now you can do over 40 million polys in a single mutires mesh). (with a poly budget of 150 for a simple object - 40 million/150 is about 250,000 polys per quad of your retopo mesh) somehow there should be decision - either your script could provide that functionality or not cleary it could not - it will create relatively small patches. now Matt told that re topology will be to simplify some areas - not all the case you mention. in this case rohith approach will suffice and provide good result. now big meshes - Nick applied a patch which effectively and quickly makes remeshing over huge meshes. Wasn't claiming to :) you was claiming that what I say is completely unappropriate and this is cleary not a case. we revealed a problem with rohith approach - only limited areas, but due to Matt note and common sence it will suffice. it could start from retopo of areas, then if good sparse matrix lib is found ( and there are such libs ) it could be extended. so the question is here - to select what is best on number of criteria. obviously you script won't handle large areas to retopo and on small meshes rohith approach has a hand - it preserves topology of mesh. While it is true that there might be some use in extending the retopo tools beyond the scope that was suggested for GSoC, the original inquiry was more narrow in nature. the applicant must win an application so it should be interesting and not trivial. Regards Sergey ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Sergey Kurdakov sergey.fo...@gmail.com wrote: Alice's thread has already veered way off-topic and I hate to derail it even further, but I feel the need to comment on this for the sake of other students that may be reading: the applicant must win an application so it should be interesting and not trivial. This is true, but it doesn't mean that a GSOC proposal must do complicated things or use complex algorithms internally. It's often better for blender to have really well thought out and well crafted simple tools that work really nicely and are achievable in the scope of the gsoc, than it is to attempt to make complicated intensive tools that a) may not even get finished over the summer and/or b) may not be that useful in real world conditions. I don't mean to make a false dichotomy, but designing and creating simple, useful, tools that people love to use can easily be as much work as implementing a complicated algorithm, and can often be more productive for artists in the end. So students, if your proposal is mathematically or algorithmically complicated that's great, but you shouldn't feel discourages if it's not, as either can be challenging in their own way and can both make acceptable GSOC projects. cheers Matt ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Matt, So students, if your proposal is mathematically or algorithmically complicated that's great, but you shouldn't feel discourages if it's not, as either can be challenging in their own way and can both make acceptable GSOC projects. there is nothing difficult to implement - there is already working code. the implementation will just interface with ready parts. Might be best to move the discussion to private mail, and let the bf-committers thread go back on topic. maybe but one question - let us select a huge part of mesh 'cut' it and feed to algo you implemented will it handle it? I think so, maybe a 'hole' will be filled - but again - Blender has a code to bring two meshes together ( more there are hints what to bring together ). the same goes for rohith approach - but here is even better - the cut area will be prevented, so to merge simplified mesh will be even easier in final there is what is pen is about. To outline area and to simplify it. And it is all within reach of SoC application. and of cause - there is no intentional heat other than - it would be better within give range of possibilities to have better outcomes. And if it discourages students - is a question. Really. They are not made of paper. Regards Sergey ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Experimental pydna
@Brecht, great to see you added this, saving second life devs further headacheds. Regarding PyDNA. Since image access was just an example use of pydna it could still be useful to allow access on windows. I think it very unlikely this will become popular/common way to bypass our own API's since its such a hassle to work with, you really have to understand DNA structs in the first place. Even if someone uses, it wont be accepted into our addons repo. Since Ton doesn't want this in blender and I'm not motivated to get this working in windows , probably it wont get in. But! If someone wants to they can embed the DNAstr/DNAlen info into their python scripts (for 32 64bits) and use this on our stable windows releases without the patch (as Bullet does - see btSerializer.cpp). ... or they could read this info from a blend file header, so its not like this is a lot harder without the patch, it just means this info needs to be kept in sync manually. Even though I'm happy with py/rna api like that there is a backdoor for special cases debugging, Its also good hint we are writing an stupid API if people want to use pydna instead :-) On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Brecht Van Lommel brechtvanlom...@pandora.be wrote: Hi, I've added simple Image.pixels access in svn now. It's not the most efficient implementation but it should work, just be sure to copy out all in the pixels into a list in one go, instead of accessing the pixels one by one. All this DNA fiddling is much too complicated.. Brecht. On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Domino Marama dom...@dominodesigns.info wrote: On Sun, 2011-04-03 at 15:32 +0200, Ton Roosendaal wrote: Hi all, Last september, Revision 31766, Campbell added this: --- ./intern/tools/pydna.py Experimental module (for developers only), exposes DNA data via python uses no blender/python modules, pure python + autogenerated ctypes api. --- Since it allows full Blender data access, scripters are using it to cover up for missing RNA parts. A 2nd Life developer in IRC asked if we could enable it on the 2.57 release, by ensuring it works for Windows as well (needs a small #ifdef DNA hack). The problem is caused by Windows linker optimising away unreferenced globals. http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/forums/en-US/vclanguage/thread/2aa2e1b7-6677-4986-99cc-62f463c94ef3 What the 'hack' does is make sure the globals used by pydna aren't removed by the windows linker. As far as I know the standard behaviour on other platforms is to export the symbols for these globals not remove them. My suggestion would be to really not do this, it doesn't belong in releases. By fixing this backdoor to work in all released binaries we only will regret it later on. We don't have our RNA project for a good reason... I'm not sure I understand why there may be regrets for enabling this on all platforms. It opens up a workflow where python coders can prototype features that wouldn't be possible otherwise. This helps show what is needed for the official API. Because 2nd Life really needs image access, I advised them to provide temporarily a special build for their users to survive the period until we have our own decent working RNA level image access. Please advise if that's acceptable? The sculpt map format in Second Life is such an oddball, that there's really no workaround other than having pixel read and write functions. Currently pydna is our only option for that. Due to the image support in Second Life, there's legacy content out there in bmp, tga and png formats. Besides the actual sculpt maps, I also generate UV layout guides so being able to see the image in Blender is also a necessary feature. Is the plan to disable pydna on Linux and Mac then? We could probably manage if we only have to do Windows builds, but neither myself, who is developing the scripts, or Gaia, who tests on Windows and does the user support, have access to Macs. Hopefully that covers the points Gaia couldn't in IRC :) Best Wishes, Domino ___ 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 -- - Campbell ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] GSoC 2011: Improving Retopology Tools
Hi Matt, I apologize, the last part of my previous message was a reply to personal message by Nick, it is very late here - so mistakes but nonetheless few hints http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?213772-One-intresting-bug-in-current-game-engine-hope-somehow-it-gets-resolved Bart Crouch bridge script to stitch meshes ( it might be needed in code used by Nick and not so with rohith approach - as the one will preserve the out vertices and they could still be merged relatively easily) Blender is capable to cut on vertexes ( cut tools ) ,and also merge meshes ( hints to make merging better in this special situation is possible but not necessary ) so cutting on vertices - the simplified submesh - submit it to mentioned ( ready ) code and then bring it back - is possible. There could be problems - but it is SoC is all about - to solve problems. the result will be really what artists want from pencil tool. Regards Sergey ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Experimental pydna
By the way, Bullet has it's own DNA structures for its serialization, with a few extra features, not the Blender DNA ;) Sent from my iPhone On Apr 3, 2011, at 5:44 PM, Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.com wrote: @Brecht, great to see you added this, saving second life devs further headacheds. Regarding PyDNA. Since image access was just an example use of pydna it could still be useful to allow access on windows. I think it very unlikely this will become popular/common way to bypass our own API's since its such a hassle to work with, you really have to understand DNA structs in the first place. Even if someone uses, it wont be accepted into our addons repo. Since Ton doesn't want this in blender and I'm not motivated to get this working in windows , probably it wont get in. But! If someone wants to they can embed the DNAstr/DNAlen info into their python scripts (for 32 64bits) and use this on our stable windows releases without the patch (as Bullet does - see btSerializer.cpp). ... or they could read this info from a blend file header, so its not like this is a lot harder without the patch, it just means this info needs to be kept in sync manually. Even though I'm happy with py/rna api like that there is a backdoor for special cases debugging, Its also good hint we are writing an stupid API if people want to use pydna instead :-) On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Brecht Van Lommel brechtvanlom...@pandora.be wrote: Hi, I've added simple Image.pixels access in svn now. It's not the most efficient implementation but it should work, just be sure to copy out all in the pixels into a list in one go, instead of accessing the pixels one by one. All this DNA fiddling is much too complicated.. Brecht. On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Domino Marama dom...@dominodesigns.info wrote: On Sun, 2011-04-03 at 15:32 +0200, Ton Roosendaal wrote: Hi all, Last september, Revision 31766, Campbell added this: --- ./intern/tools/pydna.py Experimental module (for developers only), exposes DNA data via python uses no blender/python modules, pure python + autogenerated ctypes api. --- Since it allows full Blender data access, scripters are using it to cover up for missing RNA parts. A 2nd Life developer in IRC asked if we could enable it on the 2.57 release, by ensuring it works for Windows as well (needs a small #ifdef DNA hack). The problem is caused by Windows linker optimising away unreferenced globals. http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/forums/en-US/vclanguage/thread/2aa2e1b7-6677-4986-99cc-62f463c94ef3 What the 'hack' does is make sure the globals used by pydna aren't removed by the windows linker. As far as I know the standard behaviour on other platforms is to export the symbols for these globals not remove them. My suggestion would be to really not do this, it doesn't belong in releases. By fixing this backdoor to work in all released binaries we only will regret it later on. We don't have our RNA project for a good reason... I'm not sure I understand why there may be regrets for enabling this on all platforms. It opens up a workflow where python coders can prototype features that wouldn't be possible otherwise. This helps show what is needed for the official API. Because 2nd Life really needs image access, I advised them to provide temporarily a special build for their users to survive the period until we have our own decent working RNA level image access. Please advise if that's acceptable? The sculpt map format in Second Life is such an oddball, that there's really no workaround other than having pixel read and write functions. Currently pydna is our only option for that. Due to the image support in Second Life, there's legacy content out there in bmp, tga and png formats. Besides the actual sculpt maps, I also generate UV layout guides so being able to see the image in Blender is also a necessary feature. Is the plan to disable pydna on Linux and Mac then? We could probably manage if we only have to do Windows builds, but neither myself, who is developing the scripts, or Gaia, who tests on Windows and does the user support, have access to Macs. Hopefully that covers the points Gaia couldn't in IRC :) Best Wishes, Domino ___ 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 -- - Campbell ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Blender IRC meeting
From a quick test of these scripts, 3 issues came up, #1 #2 are not blocking,
but would want to see #3 resolved before inclusion by default.
1) own math lib.
Bevel defines its own simple math functions.
cross2D, dot2D, triangle_normal, axis_angle_to_quat,
rotation_between_vectors_to_quat, intersect, these are defined in
mathutils.
mathutils docs: http://www.blender.org/documentation/250PythonDoc/mathutils.html
va module:
https://svn.blender.org/svnroot/bf-extensions/contrib/py/scripts/addons/mesh_bevel/va.py
Unless there is some problem in mathutils that cant be resolved I'd
rather not have scripts having their own math libs.
2) speed.
IMHO python is not well suited to writing mesh tools, at least not
when realtime updates from sliders is expected.
on a 4k poly mesh the bridge tool took ~4-6sec per update on my 'AMD
Phenom II X6 1055T' cpu.
Having tools which are mainly suitable for low poly modeling is fine
but I would rather they not be enabled by default.
3) polluting custom properties.
operator settings, vertex induces , and version info is written into
objects custom properties.
This gives nice user experience but I rather we have a better way to
save operator settings then each tool dumping data into the objects
metadata (especially mesh data). See below.
Since custom properties will be saved permanently in blend files I
think this really needs to go before accepting into trunk addons,
possible solutions are to remove this feature or store cache in the
python module which means at least its not saved into the blend file
and data is local to the module.
Bridge tool metadata from bridging 2 circles:
---
{'Bridge': {'boundaries': 0,
'derived': 0,
'input':
'0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63',
'input_method': 'Bridge',
'loops': {'0': {'circular': 1,
'loop': [31,
30,
29,
28,
27,
26,
25,
24,
23,
22,
21,
20,
19,
18,
17,
16,
15,
14,
13,
12,
11,
10,
9,
8,
7,
6,
5,
4,
3,
2,
1,
0]},
'1': {'circular': 1,
'loop': [33,
34,
35,
36,
37,
38,
39,
40,
41,
42,
43,
44,
45,
46,
47,
48,
49,
50,
51,
52,
53,
54,
55,
56,
57,
58,
59,
60,
61,
62,
63,
32]}},
'mapping': 0,
'single_loops': 0},
'version': '310'}
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 10:00 PM, Tom M letter...@gmail.com wrote:
Ton and Campbell,
here are the links to the relevant scripts
https://svn.blender.org/svnroot/bf-extensions/contrib/py/scripts/addons/mesh_looptools.py
Re: [Bf-committers] Blender IRC meeting
Apart from any bugs that there could be continuous grab is great for working, thinking about the screen limits when ever you want to use any transform was a thing of the past! why would we want to bring this limitation back? cheers Daniel Salazar 3Developer.com 2011/4/3 Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.com: On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote: Hi all, 1) 2.57 - Startup.blend changes: discussed were two defaults: Continuous grab: disable as default factory setting. Reasoning: it's jerky on slow redraws, on fast mouse moves it's losing offset, on small areas annoying, on headers annoying too (move up or down). People who like it or already use if have in their startup anyway, but the regular bugreports about it show it's not a good default. I wasn't at last nights meeting so reply on your points to remove. - AFAIK Continuous grab being jerky is a OSX only bug (which I assume could be fixed). - fast mouse moves can be problematic though on my system I need to purposefully thrash my mouse to give problems. - disabled on headers, committed r35985. agree it was annoying. There are 2 annoyances with it disabled. 1) Dragging a button to the right when the window is maximized often hits the edge of the screen and you need to drag multiple times or type the number in. This is more a problem in 2.5 because of vertical layout - Setting the end frame to something over 1000 is an example of this. 2) On multi-monitor transforming with the mouse outside the view can end up clicking on other windows. Why not have 2 options: Continuous Grab: [Number Buttons] and [Window Tools] Then at least number buttons could be enabled by default. ___ 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
