Re: [Bf-committers] RC2 builds please!
Thanks Sergey, I will check them. Could I mail you if there are something I can't figure out ? -- Rafael Rios Mensaje original De: g.ula...@gmail.com Fecha: 04/04/2011 20:17 Para: bf- committ...@blender.org Asunto: Re: [Bf-committers] RC2 builds please! Rafael, We aren't using default scons rules for release builts. Things are much complicated to make binary file which would run on the most of platforms. U could check build_files/config/*.py if u want to see configs we're using for release builds ;) rsaave...@ono.com wrote: Hi, I am not the builder of the official release, I am only a blender follower wanting to help I have compiled r36007 on ubuntu Maverick (i686) (10.10) and Natty (i686) (11.04 beta1) using scons. The only but is that for Natty I have to create an user-config.py with the following line: BF_PYTHON_ABI_FLAGS = 'mu' because of python3.2- dev package. For the Maverick, I have python3.2 compiled by myself, so I have to indicate the path to python in BF_PYTHON. The compiling went smooth in both enviroments. Rafael Rios -- With best regards, Sergey I. Sharybin ___ 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] RC2 builds please!
@Rafael: sure @all: maybe wiki-page with description of setting of building environment for releases would be useful? rsaave...@ono.com wrote: Thanks Sergey, I will check them. Could I mail you if there are something I can't figure out ? -- Rafael Rios Mensaje original De: g.ula...@gmail.com Fecha: 04/04/2011 20:17 Para:bf- committ...@blender.org Asunto: Re: [Bf-committers] RC2 builds please! Rafael, We aren't using default scons rules for release builts. Things are much complicated to make binary file which would run on the most of platforms. U could check build_files/config/*.py if u want to see configs we're using for release builds ;) rsaave...@ono.com wrote: Hi, I am not the builder of the official release, I am only a blender follower wanting to help I have compiled r36007 on ubuntu Maverick (i686) (10.10) and Natty (i686) (11.04 beta1) using scons. The only but is that for Natty I have to create an user-config.py with the following line: BF_PYTHON_ABI_FLAGS = 'mu' because of python3.2- dev package. For the Maverick, I have python3.2 compiled by myself, so I have to indicate the path to python in BF_PYTHON. The compiling went smooth in both enviroments. Rafael Rios -- With best regards, Sergey I. Sharybin ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] Physics Modelling Fukushima
Hi Patric, Just wondering if any of you guys are using your amazing aptitude for physics modelling and looking at the situation in Fukushima. it looks like offtopic, because nuclear station modeling does not relate to Blender code itself, no to Bullet engine etc ( physics does not mean in Blender-physics code thermodinamics and nuclear modeling for example - just mechanics ) ( though of cause there are some codes to make whole nuclear disasters modeling, usually they are made several years and might cost in spent time more than whole men-years spent on Blender development - just as nuclear energy is a multibillion business and such expensive simulations are needed). In case you would like to visualize and popularize what went there - you might take http://energyfromthorium.com/pps/FukushimaDaiichiAREVA.pps Areva presentation on what went there so far and produce high quality visuals, but you might discuss this at blenderartists.org Regards Sergey On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:04 AM, Patrick Shirkey pshir...@boosthardware.com wrote: Hi, Just wondering if any of you guys are using your amazing aptitude for physics modelling and looking at the situation in Fukushima. It would be real time(tm) to get concrete visualisations of the explosive potential of the reactor cores in their current states. Would make for some very interesting footage in the currently raging debate. Cheers. -- ___ 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 [36006] trunk/blender/source/blender/ makesrna/intern/rna_image.c: Fix for slow Image.pixels, make it a flat instead of multidimen
On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 17:10 +, Brecht Van Lommel wrote: Revision: 36006 http://projects.blender.org/scm/viewvc.php?view=revroot=bf-blenderrevision=36006 Author: blendix Date: 2011-04-04 17:10:48 + (Mon, 04 Apr 2011) Log Message: --- Fix for slow Image.pixels, make it a flat instead of multidimensional array. That working great now thanks, just one more small patch needed though.. It's just to mark the image as dirty when image.pixels is set :) === modified file 'source/blender/makesrna/intern/rna_image.c' --- source/blender/makesrna/intern/rna_image.c 2011-04-04 17:10:48 + +++ source/blender/makesrna/intern/rna_image.c 2011-04-05 08:29:44 + @@ -304,6 +304,7 @@ for(i = 0; i size; i++) ((unsigned char*)ibuf-rect)[i] = FTOCHAR(values[i]); } + ibuf-userflags |= IB_BITMAPDIRTY; } BKE_image_release_ibuf(ima, lock); ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] RC2 builds please!
A wiki-page with description of building environment for release builds would be very useful. I found that when I started build on FreeBSD, I could certainly compile fine, but had no idea there even WAS a difference between those builds and release builds until I found out I had been doing it wrong. :) On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 2:15 AM, Sergey I. Sharybin g.ula...@gmail.com wrote: @Rafael: sure @all: maybe wiki-page with description of setting of building environment for releases would be useful? rsaave...@ono.com wrote: Thanks Sergey, I will check them. Could I mail you if there are something I can't figure out ? -- Rafael Rios Mensaje original De: g.ula...@gmail.com Fecha: 04/04/2011 20:17 Para:bf- committ...@blender.org Asunto: Re: [Bf-committers] RC2 builds please! Rafael, We aren't using default scons rules for release builts. Things are much complicated to make binary file which would run on the most of platforms. U could check build_files/config/*.py if u want to see configs we're using for release builds ;) rsaave...@ono.com wrote: Hi, I am not the builder of the official release, I am only a blender follower wanting to help I have compiled r36007 on ubuntu Maverick (i686) (10.10) and Natty (i686) (11.04 beta1) using scons. The only but is that for Natty I have to create an user-config.py with the following line: BF_PYTHON_ABI_FLAGS = 'mu' because of python3.2- dev package. For the Maverick, I have python3.2 compiled by myself, so I have to indicate the path to python in BF_PYTHON. The compiling went smooth in both enviroments. Rafael Rios -- With best regards, Sergey I. Sharybin ___ 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] How to tell cmake to use system glew
I'm trying to get my blender package for Fedora to meet the packaging guidelines (which are quite extensive). One of the things I'm fighting with is that building things in statically should be avoided (like openCOLLADA). The problem I'm fighting now is that Fedora provides a glew package but I'm not sure how to make cmake use the system installation over the extern/glew version. When I look at the CMakeLists.txt I see that many of them have options which I'm assuming can be set ON/OFF with a cmake option, but glew does not seem to have an options. I'm not a C programmer so please excuse me if I'm not using the correct terminology. Thanks, Richard ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] RC2 builds please!
Ok, will write it tomorrow. pete larabell wrote: A wiki-page with description of building environment for release builds would be very useful. I found that when I started build on FreeBSD, I could certainly compile fine, but had no idea there even WAS a difference between those builds and release builds until I found out I had been doing it wrong. :) -- With best regards, Sergey I. Sharybin ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] How to tell cmake to use system glew
RIchard, so far as I know, blender needs it's own glew implementation. It is not the same as the system version. It is not something that can be turned off, since blender itself draws to the screen with OpenGL. On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com wrote: I'm trying to get my blender package for Fedora to meet the packaging guidelines (which are quite extensive). One of the things I'm fighting with is that building things in statically should be avoided (like openCOLLADA). The problem I'm fighting now is that Fedora provides a glew package but I'm not sure how to make cmake use the system installation over the extern/glew version. When I look at the CMakeLists.txt I see that many of them have options which I'm assuming can be set ON/OFF with a cmake option, but glew does not seem to have an options. I'm not a C programmer so please excuse me if I'm not using the correct terminology. Thanks, Richard ___ 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] How to tell cmake to use system glew
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 2:14 PM, pete larabell xgl.asyl...@gmail.com wrote: RIchard, so far as I know, blender needs it's own glew implementation. It is not the same as the system version. It is not something that can be turned off, since blender itself draws to the screen with OpenGL. Strange then... I have patches from the current Fedora blender maintainer that seems to do this but for scons, not cmake... Here's a snippit of the patch for one file: diff -up blender/source/blender/editors/include/BIF_gl.h.ext blender/source/blender/editors/include/BIF_gl.h --- blender/source/blender/editors/include/BIF_gl.h.ext 2011-03-23 18:31:29.545937006 +0100 +++ blender/source/blender/editors/include/BIF_gl.h 2011-03-23 18:31:54.026936914 +0100 @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ #ifndef BIF_GL_H #define BIF_GL_H -#include ../../../../extern/glew/include/GL/glew.h +#include GL/glew.h /* * these should be phased out. cpack should be replaced in And then a bunch of entries taking glew out of the includes in SConscript files. The resulting package works or I think there would be more complaints... Richard ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] test suite for image import/export
Hey all, imagemagik has a test suite for image format import/export ftp://ftp.simplesystems.org/pub/ might be good to add it to our testing folder LetterRip ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Double Edged Matte node build + video + patch + .blends :)
Linux 32bit (ubuntu 10.10) build on graphicall.org: http://www.graphicall.org/builds/builds/showbuild.php?action=showid=1818 On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:52 PM, pete larabell xgl.asyl...@gmail.com wrote: The double edge matte node has been updated! Some more speed improvements, and a consistent way of handling objects going partially off screen. Also now works correctly with RenderLayers. Video demo here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcjEfoNIHZs patch is located here: http://www.pasteall.org/20601/diff example .blend files here: http://www.pasteall.org/blend/5926 http://www.pasteall.org/blend/5927 Hope you enjoy! ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Double Edged Matte node build + video + patch + .blends :)
Hi all, I've also uploaded to vimeo. Figured that might be more blender-new-feature-video compliant :) http://www.vimeo.com/22002396 On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:58 PM, pete larabell xgl.asyl...@gmail.com wrote: Linux 32bit (ubuntu 10.10) build on graphicall.org: http://www.graphicall.org/builds/builds/showbuild.php?action=showid=1818 On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:52 PM, pete larabell xgl.asyl...@gmail.com wrote: The double edge matte node has been updated! Some more speed improvements, and a consistent way of handling objects going partially off screen. Also now works correctly with RenderLayers. Video demo here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcjEfoNIHZs patch is located here: http://www.pasteall.org/20601/diff example .blend files here: http://www.pasteall.org/blend/5926 http://www.pasteall.org/blend/5927 Hope you enjoy! ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] How to tell cmake to use system glew
Hi Richard, added WITH_BUILTIN_GLEW option to CMake r36024 which can be disabled to link against the systems GLEW library. On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com wrote: I'm trying to get my blender package for Fedora to meet the packaging guidelines (which are quite extensive). One of the things I'm fighting with is that building things in statically should be avoided (like openCOLLADA). The problem I'm fighting now is that Fedora provides a glew package but I'm not sure how to make cmake use the system installation over the extern/glew version. When I look at the CMakeLists.txt I see that many of them have options which I'm assuming can be set ON/OFF with a cmake option, but glew does not seem to have an options. I'm not a C programmer so please excuse me if I'm not using the correct terminology. Thanks, Richard ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] test suite for image import/export
This can work but IMHO its only worth doing if someone is going to setup an automated test (I'm running ctest weekly now). Our image code is it stays mostly untouched so unless some refactor is planned I don't think this gives us much of an advantage. My main motivation for setting up tests is for areas that change more frequently and problems may be hard to detect, eg: rendering, modifiers, constraints, dupli's import/export. If someone else wants to do the data entry I can setup a single image loading test which can be used as a template for others. On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Tom M letter...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all, imagemagik has a test suite for image format import/export ftp://ftp.simplesystems.org/pub/ might be good to add it to our testing folder LetterRip ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Physics Modelling Fukushima
On 04/05/2011 05:19 PM, Sergey Kurdakov wrote: Hi Patric, Just wondering if any of you guys are using your amazing aptitude for physics modelling and looking at the situation in Fukushima. it looks like offtopic, because nuclear station modeling does not relate to Blender code itself, no to Bullet engine etc ( physics does not mean in Blender-physics code thermodinamics and nuclear modeling for example - just mechanics ) ( though of cause there are some codes to make whole nuclear disasters modeling, usually they are made several years and might cost in spent time more than whole men-years spent on Blender development - just as nuclear energy is a multibillion business and such expensive simulations are needed). In case you would like to visualize and popularize what went there - you might take http://energyfromthorium.com/pps/FukushimaDaiichiAREVA.pps Areva presentation on what went there so far and produce high quality visuals, but you might discuss this at blenderartists.org In the forums? Why waste time when I can go direct to the source? I'm thinking of a counter model to the official Nuclear industry sanctioned reports. People round here are doing some amazing work with fluid modelling and such like aso maybe they want to apply some of that to modelling the cloud formations and such like? I was thinking of using Sauerbrauten to build a replication of the facility. But maybe it can be done better in Blender? Regards Sergey On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:04 AM, Patrick Shirkey pshir...@boosthardware.com wrote: Hi, Just wondering if any of you guys are using your amazing aptitude for physics modelling and looking at the situation in Fukushima. It would be real time(tm) to get concrete visualisations of the explosive potential of the reactor cores in their current states. Would make for some very interesting footage in the currently raging debate. Cheers. -- ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers -- Patrick Shirkey Boost Hardware Ltd. ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] when blender2.57beta starts not make zoom at mouse wheel
i need to select the desktop and then blender to make that the blender responds at the mouse wheel why? ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Physics Modelling Fukushima
On 04/05/2011 05:19 PM, Sergey Kurdakov wrote: Hi Patric, Just wondering if any of you guys are using your amazing aptitude for physics modelling and looking at the situation in Fukushima. it looks like offtopic, because nuclear station modeling does not relate to Blender code itself, no to Bullet engine etc ( physics does not mean in Blender-physics code thermodinamics and nuclear modeling for example - just mechanics ) You might be surprised at who is using your work and how widely these solutions can be applied ;-) Maybe someone wants to create a model of a potential way to cap the facility. Something like a concrete/barium/reinforced steel dome inner shell with an outer layer of 2 or 3 phase solid/gaseous mixture and covered again with a reinforced concrete dome... That might give people something to work with. They sure need all the help they can get at this stage... -- Patrick Shirkey Boost Hardware Ltd. ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011 Proposal: Retopology Tools
Hey Alice, I actually have a couple more suggestions for you in regards to the tool functionality. Pen Tool I feel it should not be restricted to only creating quads. Even as the topology snob that I am, occasionally it is necessary to use triangles. This is particularly true in lowpoly meshes where deformation is not a problem. When creating very lowpoly meshes it's almost essential to use triangles. Slice Tool The slice tool you have proposed is almost identical to the old knife tool, which while important, I don't feel makes sense to be part of this project. This is mostly because Joe Edgar as already implemented the beginnings of a very good knife tool alongside BMesh. It's my feeling that any retopo tools you develop should be designed to work with the future BMesh. Since Joe has already developed this I feel it would be overkill for this project. The Slice tool that I was actually referring to in my original suggestion was this one: http://3d-coat.com/uploads/pics/rtp_slices.gif What it does is allows you to quickly draw several guides across a tubular section of your mesh and automatically generate a encapsulating mesh that snaps to the surface. This method is very quick and powerful for retopo'ing anything from arms, legs, treebanchs and other tubular forms. Perhaps the tool should be renamed to Guide Strokes. Other than those couple things everything looks great for the functionality! -- Jonathan Williamson Instructor - http://www.blendercookie.com Personal Trainer - http://www.mavenseed.com Portfolio - http://www.jw3d.com On Tuesday, April 5, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Alice Li wrote: Hi, I've been working on my GSoC 2011 proposal for the last few days for adding new retopology tools. If anyone could give me any kind of feed back before I submit it I would really appreciate it, is it detailed enough? Feasibility? Too long? Too short?? etc. A really big thanks to Jonathan Williamson, Nicholas Bishop and LetterRip for their help these past couple of days. Link: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Lynseed Thanks 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 Proposal: Retopology Tools
Thanks Jonathan, I probably should have ran the slice tool by you as well. For the slice tool/guide strokes tool, I can see that it's a variation of the paint strokes tool but I'm not sure I completely understand the functionality. So the mesh that's created is generated around all the model as in 360 degrees? On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:27 AM, Jonathan Williamson jonat...@montagestudio.org wrote: Hey Alice, I actually have a couple more suggestions for you in regards to the tool functionality. Pen Tool I feel it should not be restricted to only creating quads. Even as the topology snob that I am, occasionally it is necessary to use triangles. This is particularly true in lowpoly meshes where deformation is not a problem. When creating very lowpoly meshes it's almost essential to use triangles. Slice Tool The slice tool you have proposed is almost identical to the old knife tool, which while important, I don't feel makes sense to be part of this project. This is mostly because Joe Edgar as already implemented the beginnings of a very good knife tool alongside BMesh. It's my feeling that any retopo tools you develop should be designed to work with the future BMesh. Since Joe has already developed this I feel it would be overkill for this project. The Slice tool that I was actually referring to in my original suggestion was this one: http://3d-coat.com/uploads/pics/rtp_slices.gif What it does is allows you to quickly draw several guides across a tubular section of your mesh and automatically generate a encapsulating mesh that snaps to the surface. This method is very quick and powerful for retopo'ing anything from arms, legs, treebanchs and other tubular forms. Perhaps the tool should be renamed to Guide Strokes. Other than those couple things everything looks great for the functionality! -- Jonathan Williamson Instructor - http://www.blendercookie.com Personal Trainer - http://www.mavenseed.com Portfolio - http://www.jw3d.com On Tuesday, April 5, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Alice Li wrote: Hi, I've been working on my GSoC 2011 proposal for the last few days for adding new retopology tools. If anyone could give me any kind of feed back before I submit it I would really appreciate it, is it detailed enough? Feasibility? Too long? Too short?? etc. A really big thanks to Jonathan Williamson, Nicholas Bishop and LetterRip for their help these past couple of days. Link: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Lynseed Thanks 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
Re: [Bf-committers] GSoC 2011 Proposal: Retopology Tools
Whoops! I forgot the attachment, here it is: http://db.tt/fIqXHov -- Jonathan Williamson Instructor - http://www.blendercookie.com Personal Trainer - http://www.mavenseed.com Portfolio - http://www.jw3d.com On Tuesday, April 5, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Alice Li wrote: Thanks Jonathan, I probably should have ran the slice tool by you as well. For the slice tool/guide strokes tool, I can see that it's a variation of the paint strokes tool but I'm not sure I completely understand the functionality. So the mesh that's created is generated around all the model as in 360 degrees? On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:27 AM, Jonathan Williamson jonat...@montagestudio.org wrote: Hey Alice, I actually have a couple more suggestions for you in regards to the tool functionality. Pen Tool I feel it should not be restricted to only creating quads. Even as the topology snob that I am, occasionally it is necessary to use triangles. This is particularly true in lowpoly meshes where deformation is not a problem. When creating very lowpoly meshes it's almost essential to use triangles. Slice Tool The slice tool you have proposed is almost identical to the old knife tool, which while important, I don't feel makes sense to be part of this project. This is mostly because Joe Edgar as already implemented the beginnings of a very good knife tool alongside BMesh. It's my feeling that any retopo tools you develop should be designed to work with the future BMesh. Since Joe has already developed this I feel it would be overkill for this project. The Slice tool that I was actually referring to in my original suggestion was this one: http://3d-coat.com/uploads/pics/rtp_slices.gif What it does is allows you to quickly draw several guides across a tubular section of your mesh and automatically generate a encapsulating mesh that snaps to the surface. This method is very quick and powerful for retopo'ing anything from arms, legs, treebanchs and other tubular forms. Perhaps the tool should be renamed to Guide Strokes. Other than those couple things everything looks great for the functionality! -- Jonathan Williamson Instructor - http://www.blendercookie.com Personal Trainer - http://www.mavenseed.com Portfolio - http://www.jw3d.com On Tuesday, April 5, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Alice Li wrote: Hi, I've been working on my GSoC 2011 proposal for the last few days for adding new retopology tools. If anyone could give me any kind of feed back before I submit it I would really appreciate it, is it detailed enough? Feasibility? Too long? Too short?? etc. A really big thanks to Jonathan Williamson, Nicholas Bishop and LetterRip for their help these past couple of days. Link: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Lynseed Thanks 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 mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] when blender2.57beta starts not make zoom at mouse wheel
Yes, it happens some times, but is i didn't find the reason to replicate it, but it happends some times. Cheers 2011/4/6 iozk hz iozk...@gmail.com i need to select the desktop and then blender to make that the blender responds at the mouse wheel why? ___ 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 Proposal: Retopology Tools
Okay, I understand it now - the diagram helps a lot. I'm in the process of making the changes to my proposal. On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Jonathan Williamson jonat...@montagestudio.org wrote: Whoops! I forgot the attachment, here it is: http://db.tt/fIqXHov -- Jonathan Williamson Instructor - http://www.blendercookie.com Personal Trainer - http://www.mavenseed.com Portfolio - http://www.jw3d.com On Tuesday, April 5, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Alice Li wrote: Thanks Jonathan, I probably should have ran the slice tool by you as well. For the slice tool/guide strokes tool, I can see that it's a variation of the paint strokes tool but I'm not sure I completely understand the functionality. So the mesh that's created is generated around all the model as in 360 degrees? On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:27 AM, Jonathan Williamson jonat...@montagestudio.org wrote: Hey Alice, I actually have a couple more suggestions for you in regards to the tool functionality. Pen Tool I feel it should not be restricted to only creating quads. Even as the topology snob that I am, occasionally it is necessary to use triangles. This is particularly true in lowpoly meshes where deformation is not a problem. When creating very lowpoly meshes it's almost essential to use triangles. Slice Tool The slice tool you have proposed is almost identical to the old knife tool, which while important, I don't feel makes sense to be part of this project. This is mostly because Joe Edgar as already implemented the beginnings of a very good knife tool alongside BMesh. It's my feeling that any retopo tools you develop should be designed to work with the future BMesh. Since Joe has already developed this I feel it would be overkill for this project. The Slice tool that I was actually referring to in my original suggestion was this one: http://3d-coat.com/uploads/pics/rtp_slices.gif What it does is allows you to quickly draw several guides across a tubular section of your mesh and automatically generate a encapsulating mesh that snaps to the surface. This method is very quick and powerful for retopo'ing anything from arms, legs, treebanchs and other tubular forms. Perhaps the tool should be renamed to Guide Strokes. Other than those couple things everything looks great for the functionality! -- Jonathan Williamson Instructor - http://www.blendercookie.com Personal Trainer - http://www.mavenseed.com Portfolio - http://www.jw3d.com On Tuesday, April 5, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Alice Li wrote: Hi, I've been working on my GSoC 2011 proposal for the last few days for adding new retopology tools. If anyone could give me any kind of feed back before I submit it I would really appreciate it, is it detailed enough? Feasibility? Too long? Too short?? etc. A really big thanks to Jonathan Williamson, Nicholas Bishop and LetterRip for their help these past couple of days. Link: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Lynseed Thanks 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 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 Proposal: Retopology Tools
For the 'slice and connect' tool, 1) user generate pen strokes 2) user generate a stroke that is tangent to the original strokes 3) at each intersection cast a ray perpendicular to the intersection that penetrates to the opposite side of the volume (martins 'etch a ton' continuous embedding code can do this http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Theeth/etch-a-ton - see the octopus demo - http://vimeo.com/2032424 ) 4) from this ray and the original stroke you can construct a plane then you can raycast from the center of the volume in each direction to find where to place the points of your circle (probably can reuse some shrinkwrap modifier code for this part) 5) repeat that for each slice 6) then connect the slices with a loft (see the loop tools code for lofting algorithm) other folks can probably help you a bit more with the algorithm but etch-a-ton; shrinkwrap; and looptools are where i'd look for inspiration. Regarding the 'paint stroke tool' - Alice and Johnathon - I'd completely forgotten that cambo had written his retopo tool for durian (he removed it since the durian team wasn't using it and he didn't have time then to maintain it) that does i think exactly what this is intended to do, and he plans to add it to add ons. So if that is the case, it might be a good idea to choose another retopology tool to implement for your proposal. LetterRip On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Alice Li li.ali...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Jonathan, I probably should have ran the slice tool by you as well. For the slice tool/guide strokes tool, I can see that it's a variation of the paint strokes tool but I'm not sure I completely understand the functionality. So the mesh that's created is generated around all the model as in 360 degrees? On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:27 AM, Jonathan Williamson jonat...@montagestudio.org wrote: Hey Alice, I actually have a couple more suggestions for you in regards to the tool functionality. Pen Tool I feel it should not be restricted to only creating quads. Even as the topology snob that I am, occasionally it is necessary to use triangles. This is particularly true in lowpoly meshes where deformation is not a problem. When creating very lowpoly meshes it's almost essential to use triangles. Slice Tool The slice tool you have proposed is almost identical to the old knife tool, which while important, I don't feel makes sense to be part of this project. This is mostly because Joe Edgar as already implemented the beginnings of a very good knife tool alongside BMesh. It's my feeling that any retopo tools you develop should be designed to work with the future BMesh. Since Joe has already developed this I feel it would be overkill for this project. The Slice tool that I was actually referring to in my original suggestion was this one: http://3d-coat.com/uploads/pics/rtp_slices.gif What it does is allows you to quickly draw several guides across a tubular section of your mesh and automatically generate a encapsulating mesh that snaps to the surface. This method is very quick and powerful for retopo'ing anything from arms, legs, treebanchs and other tubular forms. Perhaps the tool should be renamed to Guide Strokes. Other than those couple things everything looks great for the functionality! -- Jonathan Williamson Instructor - http://www.blendercookie.com Personal Trainer - http://www.mavenseed.com Portfolio - http://www.jw3d.com On Tuesday, April 5, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Alice Li wrote: Hi, I've been working on my GSoC 2011 proposal for the last few days for adding new retopology tools. If anyone could give me any kind of feed back before I submit it I would really appreciate it, is it detailed enough? Feasibility? Too long? Too short?? etc. A really big thanks to Jonathan Williamson, Nicholas Bishop and LetterRip for their help these past couple of days. Link: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Lynseed Thanks 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 mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
