JF make 177
JF Nav
JF Nav
Creation Date: 2002-07-22
Hello, what you are witnessing is perhaps the greatest unique thing to come out of my computer. You might say that it lacks artistic style and is ugly, but I certainly can't point you at anything else that I have created that is the product of so many productive hours. This is the cast of Scene 5 minus Javantea. Together they are approxmiately 5,000 triangles. They are all based on the same model, but each is slightly different. This is the product of my test last night to see if a GeForce2 video card could render an entire city in real time (30-60 fps). Before you shout me down, let me explain. I have this idea. I start with this TIFF heightmap that I got from USGS. I make a 3d terrain out of it. Then I use a roadmap TIFF that I also got from USGS to add buildings. The height of the buildings are gotten from a map that I bought of Seattle Business District. Then I have 100 models that I put in different parts of the city. I put a skybox and there is my city. What's wrong with that idea? Well, first of all, my GeForce2 will not render 100 models each with 500 triangles in real time. So I limit my rendered characters to 20. That's a big limit, but you'll see why I decided that. Then, I use Microsoft's MeshView to make my high-poly terrain (19602 triangles) into a statically reduced Progressive Mesh of 2000 triangles. That's a big reduction, but my Seattle map is fine with it. The truth is that cities are not curvy. Then I made a reduction to only render the 8 blocks of buildings that are closest to the camera's view (4 buildings per block). Since this is a a first-person cam and not a flight sim it won't need to see many blocks. Even the best view down a street won't need 4 blocks. A person can hardly see a half a mile down the street, especially in downtown Seattle with our curvy streets. That brings it down to 13024 triangles. At that point on the CPU side, we've only done API calls, 228 box-frustrum cull operation, 13024 backface cull operations, and the matrix-based rotation camera operations. That leaves plenty of CPU for animating the characters. Guess how many frames per second you get when you render a scene with 13k triangles and 10 skinned characters on a GeForce2? 41 fps. How do I know? Because that's what happening on the picture above. You don't see that below the apartment is the City of Seattle with a bunch of buildings. It totals 11,000 triangles. Last night it was rendering at 540,000 triangles per second. Amazing, huh? Well, you can see on this picture that it's only rendering at 20 fps. Why? Because it's 4x multisampled. I could show you the speedy version, but I like to break two barriers each night. It saves time. Also, I'd like to note that another limiting factor is resolution, right now. The higher the resolution, the slower it goes. At 1024x768, it goes fast, but at 1600x1200, it slows down to 25 fps. That's not too bad, but I want to keep up to 30-60 for smoothness for video. Yeah, I'm seriously thinking about releasing JF Anime. I really want it to be in medium, too. Then people will think: "new and fresh!"

vertices 100x100x(pv+cv+tuv0=4*9=36)=368.64 kB
faces 99x99x2x(2*3)=115 kB
textures 256x256x3xNt=192*Nt kB
vertices 16x8x(pv+cv+tuv0=4*9=36)=4.5 kB
faces 16x8x(2*3)=0.75 kB
textures 256x256x3=192 kB
vertices 500x(pv+nv+tuv0+tuv1+blend0=4*11=44)=21.484375 kB
faces 1000x(2*3)=5.859375 kB
textures 256x256x3=192 kB

1600x1200x32x2 = 15000 kB
memory usage = 15000 + 368.64+115+(192*10)+128*(4.5+0.75+192)+100*(21.484375+5.859375+192)=
15000+368.64+115+1920+25248+21934.375=64586.015 kB = 63 MB.

Hooray, it's under limit for memory usage! Barely.

faces total = 99*99*2 + 16*8*128 + 1000*100 =
19602+16384+100000 = 135986 trianges

Today I stumbled upon a "movie" trailer that I previously forgot about. It is for an anime made by an American team. It has really fresh cel-shaded style. But the trailer was a bit odd. While there was a lot of motion, there wasn't any actual animation. You know what I mean? Everytime they showed a character, it would move, but the lips, the emotions didn't change. I thought, odd, I wonder if that's something to do with the style or the laziness or maybe the trailer just is a bit premature (before the betweeners draw the in-between frames). So I went to the website and checked it out. The "movie" was out in April. I looked closer and found that it was made in Macromedia. OH! It's a Macromedia Flash Anime. I've seen a few, so it wasn't a big shock, but I thought it was great. You see, Macromedia Flash Anime can be downloaded. Not this one. It's only on DVD. It seems like it's a bit mainstream, but still pretty independent. All the staff, actors, and executive staff fit on 1/5th of a page. That's a good sign. But then I looked around and saw it was only 30 minutes long. Then I thought about it. It's a DVD that's 30 minutes long that's actually a Macromedia Flash Anime with no character in-between animations. That would be so easy to make into a download. I'm serious. There's only a few good reasons to put it onto a DVD only. One is laziness. Another is bandwidth conservation. Another is reproducability. You see, if you sell something that can be digitally copied in a small size and is of high value, you'll lose sales to people who give a copy to 10 of their cheap friends instead of two or three of them buying it and watching it together (like a family, I suppose). But the thing is that if they did their business right, they wouldn't have to worry about losing 20% of their sales. Good movies that cost a lot sell. Low-quality movies don't cost a lot so they don't need to sell. But when greedy bastards make low-quality movies that cost the GDP of a small country, you get a conflict between consumer rights and those greedy bastard's salaries. Why should I pay $25 to watch a low-quality movie once? I would happily pay $3 to see a low quality movie as many times as I can bear (twice max). But why do I want to watch low-quality movies at all? *shrug* Because I like the medium more than the content. How does capitalism differentiate from products that are of poor quality and that are of good quality? Products that are of poor-quality go into the clearance rack while good products are released in Special Edition. Thus the person is encouraged to pay double the going rate for good products and half the going rate for bad products. But the going rate is the same as four to eight days of good vegitarian food. It's outrageous. I haven't bought any media for a month and a half (well, technically Anarchy-Online is media, but that doesn't matter). Because I'm so poor and the media is so expensive, it's keeping me from viewing any media that isn't free on the internet. Well, that'll teach those greedy losers, I'm stealing thousands of dollars from them by not viewing their shitty media. Or that's what they say. Remember that a person on a computer that doesn't buy their crap is the same to them as a pirateer. A pirateer only steals the zero dollars that they were not going to pay in the first place. So if a person stays home, they steal the zero dollars that they were not going to pay in the first place. Corporations message to the people that pay their salary: "Buy or DIE."

Home Characters Making Of Technical Mail News Links |< First < Prev Next > Latest >|  bandwidth version Goto Scene