Re: [osg-users] Epic releases free version of Unreal Editor
Simon Hammett s.d.hamm...@googlemail.com wrote: I've gotten good results with exporting blender - .lwo as long as you split your model meshes up the right way, so you can run the smoothing visitor on it. Why? There is osg exporter too. Works fine: http://projects.blender.org/projects/osgexport/ It would be nice if osg could load directly out of .blend files, but the code in blender that deals with the file format is huge. Maybe somebody who is particularly bored could have a go at refactoring the .blend code into a separate library. Again, this exists already, even though you probably do not want to do it. The .blend files are more containers of a lot of different things than a scenegraph- like structure and the mapping will be tricky. The library is called readblend and comes with the Bullet physics engine. Jan signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
Re: [osg-users] Epic releases free version of Unreal Editor
2009/11/7 Jan Ciger jan.ci...@gmail.com: Simon Hammett s.d.hamm...@googlemail.com wrote: I've gotten good results with exporting blender - .lwo as long as you split your model meshes up the right way, so you can run the smoothing visitor on it. Why? There is osg exporter too. Works fine: http://projects.blender.org/projects/osgexport/ Well .lwo was the first format I found that worked and it's binary so the models load quickly. The apps I work on, load lots of stuff outta dbs, run third party dlls black boxes etc on start up, so they are already irritatingly slow to start up. There's also the problem with setting up new machines to run a project; It takes ages to join the code co-op projects, install boost other libraries, black boxes, etc, etc. Adding another step of installing blender and then getting the export script as well just makes things take longer. It would be nice if osg could load directly out of .blend files, but the code in blender that deals with the file format is huge. Maybe somebody who is particularly bored could have a go at refactoring the .blend code into a separate library. Again, this exists already, even though you probably do not want to do it. The .blend files are more containers of a lot of different things than a scenegraph- like structure and the mapping will be tricky. The library is called readblend and comes with the Bullet physics engine. Nice, thanks for the info, I'll look in to that. I'd prefer to load models directly out of the .blend file, it would save mucking about with exporting. -- http://www.ssTk.co.uk ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
Re: [osg-users] Epic releases free version of Unreal Editor
Simon Hammett s.d.hamm...@googlemail.com wrote: Well .lwo was the first format I found that worked and it's binary so the models load quickly. The apps I work on, load lots of stuff outta dbs, run third party dlls black boxes etc on start up, so they are already irritatingly slow to start up. Well, you export to .osg and then you can always convert to binary .ive once you are happy with the model. There's also the problem with setting up new machines to run a project; It takes ages to join the code co-op projects, install boost other libraries, black boxes, etc, etc. Adding another step of installing blender and then getting the export script as well just makes things take longer. Hmm, how is that different from going the .lwo route? You need Blender installed and export to .lwo as well, no? Nice, thanks for the info, I'll look in to that. I'd prefer to load models directly out of the .blend file, it would save mucking about with exporting. You can actually automate the export - e.g. the Soya3D engine does it in that way that whenever the user requests a .blend file to be loaded, it spawns Blender in the background calling it with a command line argument to load the model and call the export script. The result is then cached and the model is re-exported only when the .blend file is newer than the cached data. The user never has to tinker with the exporter, they just notice Blender starting once when the model is exported for the first time. Jan signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
Re: [osg-users] Epic releases free version of Unreal Editor
2009/11/7 Jan Ciger jan.ci...@gmail.com: Simon Hammett s.d.hamm...@googlemail.com wrote: Well .lwo was the first format I found that worked and it's binary so the models load quickly. The apps I work on, load lots of stuff outta dbs, run third party dlls black boxes etc on start up, so they are already irritatingly slow to start up. Well, you export to .osg and then you can always convert to binary .ive once you are happy with the model. which is yet another step in the process. that's making things more complicated, not less. and .lwo works rather nicely so why change? There's also the problem with setting up new machines to run a project; It takes ages to join the code co-op projects, install boost other libraries, black boxes, etc, etc. Adding another step of installing blender and then getting the export script as well just makes things take longer. Hmm, how is that different from going the .lwo route? You need Blender installed and export to .lwo as well, no? yes, but you don't have to hunt up the osg exporter script and install that. again, it's adding yet another step the process. Nice, thanks for the info, I'll look in to that. I'd prefer to load models directly out of the .blend file, it would save mucking about with exporting. You can actually automate the export - e.g. the Soya3D engine does it in that way that whenever the user requests a .blend file to be loaded, it spawns Blender in the background calling it with a command line argument to load the model and call the export script. The result is then cached and the model is re-exported only when the .blend file is newer than the cached data. The user never has to tinker with the exporter, they just notice Blender starting once when the model is exported for the first time. Jan Well I could do that on my development machine, but I'm not going to take that route for client machines. Sometimes our apps are rolled out to many hundreds of machines; am I supposed to ask them to install blender, install the export script, then install our app x 700 times? That's just not going to fly. Exporting to .lwo is easy and if that readblend library you mentioned is a viable route then I can simplify things by removing another job that I have to do. btw, do you have any xp with that library? I'd much appreciate any thing extra you can tell me about it. -- http://www.ssTk.co.uk ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
Re: [osg-users] Epic releases free version of Unreal Editor
Simon Hammett s.d.hamm...@googlemail.com wrote: which is yet another step in the process. that's making things more complicated, not less. and .lwo works rather nicely so why change? Because .osg can capture also things that are native to the scenegraph that you cannot capture in .lwo (e.g. shaders). Moreover, the compiled .ive is optimized by the OSG optimizer, saving even more loading time. Sometimes our apps are rolled out to many hundreds of machines; am I supposed to ask them to install blender, install the export script, then install our app x 700 times? That's just not going to fly. Then you are doing it wrong, in my opinion. If you are provisioning 700 machines, you should have a premade system image with all this preconfigured or an installer that will install all the tools the user needs in one go (Blender and the scripts are freely redistributable). Then having an extra exporter or whatever doesn't matter. Are you really saying that you are installing (or have the users install) 700 machines manually?? I do not know your exact situation, but this sounds rather crazy to me. Anyhow, I am not going to tell you how to do your job - if it works for you, by all means stay with it. btw, do you have any xp with that library? I'd much appreciate any thing extra you can tell me about it. No, I didn't try it, I just saw it in Bullet when I have played with it. Regards, Jan signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
Re: [osg-users] Epic releases free version of Unreal Editor
2009/11/7 Jan Ciger jan.ci...@gmail.com: Simon Hammett s.d.hamm...@googlemail.com wrote: which is yet another step in the process. that's making things more complicated, not less. and .lwo works rather nicely so why change? Because .osg can capture also things that are native to the scenegraph that you cannot capture in .lwo (e.g. shaders). Moreover, the compiled .ive is optimized by the OSG optimizer, saving even more loading time. And if I needed shaders or animation I'd be using the osg export script. Like I said, .lwo does it for me, so why add an extra step? Sometimes our apps are rolled out to many hundreds of machines; am I supposed to ask them to install blender, install the export script, then install our app x 700 times? That's just not going to fly. Then you are doing it wrong, in my opinion. If you are provisioning 700 machines, you should have a premade system image with all this preconfigured or an installer that will install all the tools the user needs in one go (Blender and the scripts are freely redistributable). Then having an extra exporter or whatever doesn't matter. Are you really saying that you are installing (or have the users install) 700 machines manually?? I do not know your exact situation, but this sounds rather crazy to me. I completely agree, it is crazy. But we sell s/w to small/medium sized manufacturing companies and that's the way most of them do this stuff. We try and persuade them otherwise, but it's very rare for anybody to ever listen. And even then, our s/w isn't just used directly by the clients, it's distributed to their many sales reps who are independent companies of only 1 or 2 people. Most the of the sales reps are people who have trouble walking and talking at the same time, so the install process has to be as simple as possible. In the manufacturing world most companies have very small profit margins and are therefore very reluctant to spent money and are very conservative and as a suppler to those companies, our profits are minimal as well unfortunately. My development machine is over 4 years old and my monitor is over 10 years old. But I get to do quite a bit of graphics work, so that makes up for the other irritations. Anyhow, I am not going to tell you how to do your job - if it works for you, by all means stay with it. I wish we wouldn't... btw, do you have any xp with that library? I'd much appreciate any thing extra you can tell me about it. No, I didn't try it, I just saw it in Bullet when I have played with it. Ah, ty. -- http://www.ssTk.co.uk ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
Re: [osg-users] Epic releases free version of Unreal Editor
Hi Simon, Blender file is a container like 3dsmax file. If you want to load .blend in osg directly it will be very complex and not suitable for a lot of cases. Anyway, if you really want it i would suggest to make a plugin that run osg export in background mode and then load the result in osg. Of course it depends of your usage, i use osgexport and it works very well, do you have some problem with it ? Cheers, Cedric -- +33 659 598 614 Cedric Pinson mailto:cedric.pin...@plopbyte.net http://www.plopbyte.net On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 19:14 +, Simon Hammett wrote: 2009/11/6 Jean-Sébastien Guay jean-sebastien.g...@cm-labs.com: Hi all, looks much better I didn't mean to start a discussion about engine licensing and use. I assumed that if we're here it's probably because we want to use OSG and design / write our own engines! I was focusing on the toolset. And in fact, I was probably overly enthusiastic about the Unreal toolset being available, because the licensing terms say that it (the engine in this case includes the toolset) can only be used for free for noncommercial and educational projects. So that rules out using it to make assets for an OSG-based commercial project, which is what I was excited about. Oh well. I guess Blender + text editor is still the (free) toolset of choice... Yah, blender is the only tool I've found useful with osg so far. Even then you have to be careful. I've gotten good results with exporting blender - .lwo as long as you split your model meshes up the right way, so you can run the smoothing visitor on it. At some point when I've got time I would like to add crease angle support to the visitor which would make modelling a whole lot easier. It would be nice if osg could load directly out of .blend files, but the code in blender that deals with the file format is huge. Maybe somebody who is particularly bored could have a go at refactoring the .blend code into a separate library. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
[osg-users] Epic releases free version of Unreal Editor
Hi all, I expect most of you have already seen this: http://www.develop-online.net/news/33198/Epic-releases-free-version-of-Unreal-Engine I'm mostly interested in this for the toolset, which is apparently very robust. If the file formats are reasonably open and we can make plugins to read the data that comes out, it may be an excellent way to create very good assets for OSG-based projects. Consider the following scenario: someone has been doing game assets for a while now and feels very comfortable in that kind of pipeline. Now, they want to start having a family, or maybe just have a more stable work schedule without all the crunch times that game development companies still impose. Well, companies making simulators, serious games, or other 3D products might be able to hire these people more easily if they can adopt toolsets that those people are familiar with. I think that kind of scenario will become more common as the huge teams of game artists start aging, which is already starting and will only increase in the next few years. Kind of analogous to the general population with all the baby-boomers these days. And on a completely selfish note, I know our own content creation pipeline could use some help... Especially once we start integrating more effects, it's going to get hairy. So I'll be checking this out for sure to see if it can help. J-S -- __ Jean-Sebastien Guayjean-sebastien.g...@cm-labs.com http://www.cm-labs.com/ http://whitestar02.webhop.org/ ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
Re: [osg-users] Epic releases free version of Unreal Editor
Yeah I spent quite a bit of time playing with the UT editor way back with the release before UT 2K3 It was crap then and I doubt it's got any better. The last UT sucked nads. And actually so did the one before that. It was pretty much on a par with Valve's 'Hammer Editor' which is also a massive ball suck, but hey at least Valve are a success so you might be able to find some talented level designers who know how to use it. And AFAIK they both share roots with the early ID toolset from Doom/Quake days. At least ID had the excuse of being Pioneers. Call me cynical but I don't see this as any more than a last gasp of an irrelevant game dev. studio. I'm still waiting for DN'em Forever ;) 2009/11/6 Jean-Sébastien Guay jean-sebastien.g...@cm-labs.com: Hi all, I expect most of you have already seen this: http://www.develop-online.net/news/33198/Epic-releases-free-version-of-Unreal-Engine I'm mostly interested in this for the toolset, which is apparently very robust. If the file formats are reasonably open and we can make plugins to read the data that comes out, it may be an excellent way to create very good assets for OSG-based projects. Consider the following scenario: someone has been doing game assets for a while now and feels very comfortable in that kind of pipeline. Now, they want to start having a family, or maybe just have a more stable work schedule without all the crunch times that game development companies still impose. Well, companies making simulators, serious games, or other 3D products might be able to hire these people more easily if they can adopt toolsets that those people are familiar with. I think that kind of scenario will become more common as the huge teams of game artists start aging, which is already starting and will only increase in the next few years. Kind of analogous to the general population with all the baby-boomers these days. And on a completely selfish note, I know our own content creation pipeline could use some help... Especially once we start integrating more effects, it's going to get hairy. So I'll be checking this out for sure to see if it can help. J-S -- __ Jean-Sebastien Guay jean-sebastien.g...@cm-labs.com http://www.cm-labs.com/ http://whitestar02.webhop.org/ ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org -- http://www.ssTk.co.uk ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
Re: [osg-users] Epic releases free version of Unreal Editor
Hi Simon, Yeah I spent quite a bit of time playing with the UT editor way back with the release before UT 2K3 It was crap then and I doubt it's got any better. This release is not the level editor that shipped with any of the games. It's the toolset that was used to create the assets for the games (along with the engine itself). It was not previously available without paying a lot of money for licenses of the SDK. Call me cynical but I don't see this as any more than a last gasp of an irrelevant game dev. studio. The problem with that reasoning is that the Unreal Engine is not used only by Epic in their own games (even though the last UT sucked nads which is a very compelling and objective argument) but by a very large number of other devs. That was the basis of my argument about large numbers of people knowing the toolset. Once again, we're not talking about the freely downloadable level editor, but the actual toolset and engine used by the game development teams to create assets, scripts, etc. during development of the games. From what I've heard, the Unreal Engine is one of the most well-regarded toolsets in the industry. Many many games have been made with it, in many genres, including shooters, RPGs, MMOs, etc. Look it up. J-S -- __ Jean-Sebastien Guayjean-sebastien.g...@cm-labs.com http://www.cm-labs.com/ http://whitestar02.webhop.org/ ___ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
