[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu3dkit-discuss] Advanced Rendering Interface
From: |
Philippe C . D . Robert |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu3dkit-discuss] Advanced Rendering Interface |
Date: |
Thu, 9 Jan 2003 20:54:43 +0100 |
On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 02:15 Uhr, Gerard Iglesias wrote:
Happy new year and best wishes....
Thanks, same 2u all!
On Thursday, December 26, 2002, at 01:18 PM, Philippe C.D. Robert
wrote:
OK you want to make a new QuickRenderman implementation, not a bad
idea, in fact maybe it is a real good idea and make sense on the Mac
platform ;)
I am not sure if a pure QRM implementation would be worth it, but I
have to look more into this... anyway, the most interesting part
would probably be the RenderMan shader language.
Sorry to be more precise I was thinking of implementing the Renderman
API in OpenGL, that is using real time rendering technique to
implement shaders, but that is true that it doesn't mean getting
something running in real time....
QRM was a simplification of the rendering process to get something
running at a correct speed on a NeX 68040 ;)
QRM was very limited - shading was essentially not there. I am not sure
that we need a RenderMan renderer anymore, but if we can implement a
shading language/compiler which is compliant to the RenderMan Shading
Language but uses an OpenGL backend, this would be almost perfect..:-)
And sure the tough part will be to implement renderman shader in
OpenGL, in fact a very interesting engineering/research problem, good
point and a subject by itself, good ....
Yup ...:-) It is like reimplementing SGI OpenGL Shader, and I am not
sure I am allowed to work on such a beast.
If it is additional stuff, yes why not - esp. having more physics
functionality would be cool! As for the current C implementation, I
think it is quite well optimised, but then there are always ways to
improve..
I was thinking about new geometrical stuff, there is also physical
stuff in it, a simple port would be possible, I don't think that the
given code is very optimised, and I will take a look at the licensing
agreement.
You mean you want to integrate some existing code into the GeometryKit?
What is it you want to integrate into the GeometryKit, if I may ask?
-Phil
--
Philippe C.D. Robert
http://www.nice.ch/~phip