Ocean Sim Development Fundraiser
A community effort to raise funds for porting the Blender 2.4x Ocean Sim script to 2.5 worked very well. SO well in fact, that they’re now extending the fundraiser to develop further features. They use the money to pay developer Matt Ebb. Great idea.
November 19, 2010 – Launched on November 17, SaveTheOceanSim.com is a website concerned with bringing back the Ocean Sim feature developed for 2.4x and porting it to a 2.5 branch. This is a feature that was left behind in the 2.4x series, and many people have been asking for it back. I also was interested in using it for a personal project of mine that I am working on www.reignoffury.com, and so I decided to look for community support to fund the development costs since others wanted the feature as well.
Needless to say, community support has been overwhelming! The initial goal of $350 was raised within 24 hours of posting the site. Interest is still high, and new offers of support are still coming in, so I have decided to raise the fundraising goal to $1500, and all new funding will go towards improving the Ocean Sim feature after the porting work has been completed.
Please head over to www.savetheoceansim.com to read more about the original feature, and donate today!
Thank you,
Todd McIntosh
Resonance Media and Design, Toronto, Canada
Wish I could contribute :( Seems awesome <:(
YEEEAHH! Blendernation coverage :D
Please donate guys! Let’s make this development happen :)
Man, it’s hard to donate to things like these if you in S.A.
Hmm… Funny. Isn’t Blender already capable of creating a convincing ocean scenes? (Examples: http://vimeo.com/16643687 and http://vimeo.com/16331310 and http://vimeo.com/5752928) I have some simple suggestions for the developers of Blenders for significant improvements for current potentials for oceanic simulations. Does anybody know whom I can contact for improvements regarding texture nodes and meta balls and particles?
Hi, Christophe! Don’t suffer because of this. There where it’s no you fault – it’s no fault. I’m not reach enough to build and support an orphant house for dogs and cats – I don’t suffer from this. I just has some of them in my flat, feeding them and watching about their health and that’s all I can do. It’s alike situation.
Take things as they are.
BTW… Can we do some bug testing? If this will help…
Yay, the goal is reached withing less than a quater of the time goal :D
and whoa, this project has some serious support: 1511$ by 49 donors… Some guys where really generous.
30.84$ on Average.
If this continues as it does, the feature can’t take much longer ’till it’s added :)
Ha,
I just found that on another website a few days ago, because I was looking for an ocean texture and I thought it would be good to have an fundraising campaign on blender nation… so here it is. So I guess now I need to donate an we got it work.
That`s why I love the Blender comunity!!!
I wrote a post in the python forum over a BA a long time ago relating to this type of thing:
http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?t=80721
and got no response. I was merely trying to point coders to some excellent work done by Marc Jacquier along these same lines for POVray/Moray (ages ago) that had produced excellent results, IMO. Was hoping something similar would come to blender, so its good news that Matt is working on this.
Here’s hoping he’ll look into the code I’ve linked to in the above post – to maybe get some hints & pointers to make the script even better! (?)
Cheers! -m
This may be the future of Blender development.
We can vote with our wallets about what we want fixed, or added.
If we pay developers to code these unfinished projects, Blender will improve much faster.
Waiting for the Blender foundation to get around to what we want has proven frustrating for many users from what I read online.
A big thank you to BlenderNation for providing coverage on this fundraising project today! The response today from your article was great, and it got us over the finish line on the donation goal that we had set previously! I’m continually amazed at the ability for this community to rally around a Blender cause, and this was no exception.
We are continuing to accept donations, if people would still like to have their name associated with the project. Continue to check in with the project web site at http://www.savetheoceansim.com for continued updates on development. We may well need some volunteers to do some testing for us, so stay tuned!
Todd
@Moolah
All I meant is that South Africa doesn’t support international debit orders… O.o
OK :) Anyway – that’s the reason to not worry too.
@Terrachild
Matt Ebb has already stated that there is absolutely no guarantee this will make it into an official release of Blender. Todd McIntosh is fully aware of this yet feels under no obligation to inform the community. Also this feature was not in 2.4x series as he claims but was implemented as a patch in a build by Kai Kostack.
Don’t be disappointed if you don’t see this in an official build of Blender. Only Ton can guarantee this.
@sx-1 – I think that if you go to the project site, it’s pretty clear that we are building a 2.5 branch with the new Ocean Tools. Obviously, there is no guarantee that this will make it into trunk, you are right, however everyone will still have access to the branch to use for their own productions.
Also, one of the main reasons the original Ocean Sim patch did not make it into trunk was due to the large FFTW dependency library it used. This time around, we will be using the FFTW library already included in 2.5 for smoke sim, so that will be less of an issue for trunk inclusion. There shouldn’t be any major reason this would not get included in trunk in the future.
I it should be implemented into wave modifier,because is in relationship with wave functions,instead of using this obsolete wave feature in blender.Blender developers should get their head out of the 90’s happy days and move on to create a muscle features blender package.
I mean the last time I try to use this ocean feature around – what?-35 years ago? I mean it feel like it been a long time.yeah, I been call a dog by women-so imagine my time is short.
sigh!,I already have a test build with more advance setting and friendly use functions.
please support this campaign – old blender deserved it.
@Todd McIntosh
There’s a big difference between raising $1,500 to put something into the trunk.
and raising $1,500 dollars to put something into a branch.
Thank you for clearing that up.
I just would not want people to imagine that they are actually making a donation to blender when in actual fact they are making a donation to your private project.
After all that may have a negative effect on the community in general. I’m sure you understand.
@sx-1 – Perhaps this post was not as clear as it could have been. Apologies for that. That being said, in spite of this being organized by a private individual, the end result will be a publicly available branch project that will be eventually submitted for trunk inclusion suitability once the feature freeze is lifted. Currently, comments from Ton and Matt indicate no major reasons why this project would be blocked from inclusion, except for reasons of usability and stability. The task at hand is to focus on building a tool that fulfills those requirements.
@Todd McIntosh
It’s very reassuring to hear the Ton is aware of the project.
I take you have spoken to him.
I just think that your approach has been somewhat hap hazard, and that if it is included, people may imagine that if they want a feature in trunk, they can just run a fund raiser. And if it is isn’t included people may feel cheated.
@sx-1 – yes I have spoken with Ton, as I wanted to make sure we didn’t take steps that would automatically preclude future trunk inclusion.
His comments were:
“Modifier stack sounds better than displace texture :) The results Matt already achieved with ocean sim are very encouraging, so it definitely has a good chance to get included. I just hope we can avoid the pitfalls related to cloth and similar features, which were added without real (= studio quality) use case testing”
I’m going to have to disagree with the comment about a haphazard approach. This project, although started by an individual is clearly an expression of many blender artists’ desire to regain access to this tool, but within the new 2.5 interface. Even as a branch, this would give them that functionality, and I believe there is value in providing the feature if even only in a branch version of Blender.
The prospect of getting trunk inclusion would be a wonderful bonus in my opinion. I agree with you about managing people’s expectations of automatic trunk inclusion, but I would certainly not discourage any one from starting a branch for any reason, paid or volunteered, in order to try out new ideas and features.
@Todd McIntosh
If it gets in to Trunk that would indeed be a wonderful bonus and I wish you all the best.
Most of my builds come from graphical so I would definitely encourage different builds and patches and addons. But since most of the builds I use come from graphical and include patches and optimization I also understand the frustration and disappointment when they don’t make it to trunk. Which is why I feel it’s important to be clear about what your offering.
As for the hap hazard approach. You started the appeal on BA. I was the first to suggest that it would not get into Trunk. Matt confirmed this. I mentioned Kai Kostack’s build and you contacted him to make his build available again which he did, and in the process presented those interested with the possibility to see or remember what they were buying into . He became interested and showed 2.49 data being rendered in 2.5 and began discussing the implementation with Matt, and the ball began to roll. So no, your approach was not structured or considered.
@sx-1 – Well, you’re welcome to believe whatever you want. I hope you are able to put the Ocean Sim Branch version to good use after we finish it. Cheers.
@Todd McIntosh
Well I’ve already said on BA that I’m not particularly interested in Ocean Sim. But if your doing a fund raiser for I.B.L. and everyone agrees that there’s no reason why it shouldn’t go in to the trunk then give me a bell.
P.S. no need to think on this one. Matt’s already said that there are reasons why it can’t be integrated.
I think that it’s no matter what will be first – OceanSim Branch or the directly added feature to SVN. Some day it will be in SVN for sure.
Todd, what is the progress on the Ocean Texture? I asked because if we need to decide something then we must know at least approximately – what is the stage of it. My opinion is that Ocean Texture is also a very neat feature and can be used for compositing (for example for Distort – Displace node), maybe some other creative ways because it’s animated.
Hi Moolah,
A progress report was emailed to all sponsors yesterday, your email included. Let me know if you did not receive it. Cheers.
Yes, I recieved it :) And that’s why I did wrote here. I thought that “concern” means discussions. Am I supposed to write in BlenderArtists forum?
@Moolah – Well, initially I was looking to get direct feedback via email first. Cheers.