|
|
Heightfield_gt/Rutt Etra My questions about this are mainly at Vade, but I figured it would probably be of benefit to other forum members that might be interested in implementing features in plugins and not have them be whack-a-do, rather than have it be some off-forum discussion. I started asking about this stuff on the v002 Open Kinect thread, and realized it should really be it's own thread. Sooo... I'm including a zip of where I'm at now. The main things that are different with this and the last v002 source are... -There are x/y/z translation and rotation controls. -Depth testing port. -Blend modes independent of wireframe modes, and some experimental ones. ... and that's about it. I want to figure out how to get line stippling going with the wireframe modes and also not have console bark at me about unbinding of the texturing going wrong, every which way I've tried to have it work. I've totally eradicated all stippling code from this zip, since it was all screwy anyway and doesn't take long to edit in (err, once I figure out what I'm doing wrong). Once I get that going, I'd like to try polygon stippling. It's something with the texture representation stuff that's just going over my head at the moment I think. I've had the stippling working fine in different scenarios, besides this project. I'd kinda just like to see some of this lopped into the v002 proper, especially after hearing about the new techniques that are being tried out.
|
I answered my own question by looking at gl tools, and got stippling working without problems. I hadn't been keeping track of old pattern and count. So, Console doesn't whine, and all seems well.
Source Code compilation succeeds but with the following error stated on gtshader.m
and a similar warning on GLubyte * .
Similar warnings too on the original source code posting, just going to see if its crucial to the heightfield plugin working.
It doesn't seem to make too much difference at all.
Interesting employment and further development of the v002 source code base .
Yeahhh, that's an error in the way the error log stuff is written, I think. Check Console, and debug stuff; it doesn't seem to make a difference, and conversion happens fine. I don't get any errors in console or in debug, only that warning about that conversion on compile.
I've scrutinized that quite a bit, and will try to fix it soon (if it's fixable/if anyone knows how to fix that, please let me know). There's a really similar error with the ARToolkit stuff, out of the box. I don't think it makes any difference, or does anything crummy.
I need to check that. The Rutt Etra source actually didn't have the shader helper classes, so it doesn't have all of the necessary resources to compile (I'm pretty sure...!).
I wound up "backing into" what I think they should be (?) by looking at other v002 source code.
I just implemented face culling (this won't work in wireframe/point modes, only the image plane). Also, I would go ahead and replace if you loaded, just because I made more explicit notes about donating to Bill Etra (besides quoting Vade's note). The only reason I didn't call this something "Rutt Etra" is because I didn't want to taint the Rutt Etra name w/ my personal wants for features on the patch. Thanks @ Bill and Vade x 10.
Also, if you fiddle around and change a blend mode and don't see anything, try manipulating the clear color, changing alpha, or making background white. Some of the special blend modes are like "add" in that you won't see anything with a white background, and one of the others needs alpha to be closer to 0 to see image... black will mute it out.
...and think, if I hadn't have given source, you'd never know :P
I just figured out what was causing those warnings in the error logging setup. Corrected. (I don't think it actually impacted anything performance wise.) Thanks for mentioning that... I had just been using the v002 helper classes from another project without changing, out of being shy (where it was giving me the same warning I think). When you build and get those warnings once, they don't show up again, you just see "successful build" with no warnings.
Can you please, please, please, please, at least include the license and abide by what I ask you to with the source? A reminder, Creative Commons Attribution, No Commercial, Share alike.
That kind of shit annoys me to no end. Huge pet peeve.
Where did I not include what needs to be included (seriously... I was really worried I might miss something that might peeve you credits wise, so I'm sorry I missed something!)?
I included your copyright in the source, notes to donate to bill, put your verbiage and web links in the description, went to pains to note it was a customization, etc. I didn't think I eradicated anything that was supposed to stay in there, I seriously don't mean to peeve you out. I'll look through and try to figure it out, but it might be faster if you let me know exactly what I'm being ignorant about.
The compiled plugin has no license included, which means someone might include it in a commercial app and re-sell it - and claim ignorance or public domain, etc. I don't expect it to happen, but including a license and a readme or something with both is pretty much standard procedure.
Its not a huge deal, its just one of those things small things I ask in exchange for keeping things free, and having source available to learn from. I think overall putting these things out is pretty damn generous, so having credit, licensing and what not is important to me.
I do thank you for putting the info in the source, that is appreciated.
Sorry, its just one of the few 'easy to press' buttons I have.
Ok, I'm feeling like an idiot...
I'm looking inside your compiled version... I don't see any read me or license stuff that it looks like I forgot anywhere in the bundle.
So, I'm looking the patch description... I quoted your description, and added that it was quoted. I don't see a creative commons thing.
The DMG for the v002 Rutt Etra has a readme, and license link attachment, in the single download that contains source and binary.
Got it. Is this ok? I added the note from the read me into the plugin description, and also added the readme, with a note on the top, of explanation.
I hadn't even seen that (sorry), and had just looked at the stuff in the source. It probably wouldn't be a bad idea to add that licensing note to the source in the future.
I was sharing it in the spirit that you shared your source, thinking that maybe looking at what you've published and then various added functions might shed light for others... and also more for a discussion of technique and how to properly implement features. It's certainly a freebie.
Like I said, no worries, I'd just.. prefer there be less chance of abuse / misunderstanding.
Whew. Serious sigh of relief. If you actually have time to look, and like any feature ideas, please feel free to use as you wish.
:) Sure thing. I've not played with Polygon stippling at all, so your post had me curious. The line stippling thing is interesting feature wise, I may experiment with it myself!
Sorry if I came off as being... well, whatever I came off as, like I said in email, no worries, and I'm not pissed, its more because people lurk on forums like these where creative coders share ideas, and blatantly rip them off, steal source, sell it and use it commercially. Not having a license in there in the download for the binary makes me nervous. Thats all :)
Awesome.
The polygon stippling isn't in this stuff I've zipped up, but I have it working at this point. It's interesting to be able to make patterns that way...lots of choices though.
Here's some pics of the polygon stipple. I've only tried out a couple of test patterns; a fly, and a halftone stipple.
The thing that sort of surprises me, is that it seems like polygon stippling doesn't change with rotation, which results in a funny kind of effect.