Non-Blender: SIGGRAPH 2012 – Technical Papers Preview Trailer
Mathias Panzenböck writes:
Awesome preview of some technical papers presented at SIGGRAPH 2012.
Clouds of War
Mathias Panzenböck writes:
Awesome preview of some technical papers presented at SIGGRAPH 2012.
Take ALL the technical papers … and integrate them into Blender! ;)
Lol true! That would be so awesome! :D
Agreed. SIGGRAPH looks to be amazing this year, I wish I could go. :
origami..
Perfect name for the branch !
But not until all the basic mesh tools and user interface screens are 100% perfect first though! ;o)
@900d768c34a1e4698f8d5e9b93b4e706:disqus I had the same thought, would be so effin’ cool.
Same here :). And a lot of others will follow i guess. All of it just seem amazing must-haves
You really need those features? What for?
Which features do you think are so pointless?
I don’t really need anything–I just want everything. ;0
You never know when a situation can apply those tools. Especially in mixed and abstract workflows.
Awesome… I like the Locomotion very much… must be added to Blender and my 3D application framework (engine)… Looks really nice! What will be released in SIGGRAPH 2013? GDC 2013?
Well, we know what to aim for for Google Summer of Code 2013…. :-)
This does look amazing. I want to go!
Wow, is this interesting.
Yeah, is that soda or beer?
it’s coffee :P
so any idea what any of those examples are designed/rendered in?
I absolutely love summer. E3 in June. SIGGRAPH in August. And Google Summer of Code all in between! I like my summers thick with technological announcements and breakthroughs!
Man, this year is very exciting on the simulation end.
What I ment is Blender users are always missing some features, they need ptex, planar tracking, volumetrics and all this stuff from the video. But what annoys me is that number of new features doesn’t go along with number of quality renders and artworks, if a new, fantastic image appears it is usually made by well known Blender-head, while the rest is just seeking for new tools for… nothing actually. Perhaps the idea of having those features is exciting enough but the number of people that really know how to use current features within Blender is low. In other words we should all start doing something valuable using what we’ve got now instead of demanding new stuff. Such fan-attitude is sometimes encouraging, especially for developers, but results in nothing interesting.
Regarding (quote) “the number of people that really know how to use current features within Blender is low”… the same can be said for anything, software or otherwise. It is similar to asking why fine musical instruments are still made when there are so few truly superior musicians in the world. If we limit development based on a philosophy of “why bother, when only 10% of the base are proficient and only the top 1% are truly inspired”, we’d all be drawing on Etch-A-Sketches!
I guess it’s not exactly the same but ok, it’s your opinion. All I want to say is today Blender is filled with features that has never been used (or I haven’t seen any examples yet) while it lacks with some basic tools. Instead of very spectacular things like smoke simulations, tracking surface with evolving topology, underwater rigid body behaviours I would like to have solid Outliner, good bevel and loop slides (the ones from 2.49b), horizontal panels or faster viewport navigation. Pimping up Blender with new features that look cool but has never been used proffessionaly except some tests (dynamic paint, fluid particles) is nonsense. Blender is based on fans but if it wants to be a serious software in CG Industry it needs to focus on more essential things.
I guess I’m just not sure how the work is divided up — I gather that some of the developers are responsible for more than one aspect of the code at a time, but I don’t believe that the dynamic paint guy was ever in charge of the GUI for example. Aren’t these “wow, fancy” developments done by separate people from those who maintain the interface and the core mesh tools?
Mookie80,
I agree with you on the point Blender needs some improvement in basic fundamentals like good bevel, loop slides, align tools, etc. like some of the other major packages (coming from Max I do find some stuff frustrating in what blender does not have). On the other-hand, the Wowtastic stuff you say blender does not need and should not get, I would have to disagree. Blender is Free, and for a free piece of software, it is outstanding.
Those individuals who take the time to develop blender, whether, adding wowtatstic or a better bevel, do so without charging you a dime to use it. When I stopped using Max a few years back, It did not have integrated Suclpt, smoke sim, fluid sim, dynamic paint and a ton of other cool features blender has. This is the stuff that makes blender cool, the fact that if you see something lacking, guess what, you can fix it. You don’t have to wait for the company to decide the software needs that feature, you can just add it your self. I know, I know you are probably saying “but I am not a developer” well, stop complaining about what blender lacks, learn to write C or Python, Fork the source and add the feature, or stop complaining.
The Blender developers should concentrate on improving the current tools before adding new ones. We’ve had the new fluid particles for a while now but still no remesher, so it’s basically useless for most scenarios. And the old fluid sim is very buggy.
What is this sorcery?
Genetic programming I think is well suited to be in nodes.
I wonder how interface evolution would look like.
I wish the Blender developers would concentrate on integrating Blender with my dishwasher so I don’t have to take put the dishes away.