Cueball
User
Posts: 155 | Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 3:20 AM
Hi there!
Thanks to Carls nice orthographic renderings of
his lightcycle i was able to try my own ones.
Cant wait to get it completed 
Dirkwhere to buy abortion pill http://blog.bitimpulse.com/template/default.aspx?abortion-types buy abortion pill online
|
Mr. Sinistar
Sector Admin
Posts: 1,642 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 10:09 AM
WHOA!  Great job, Cueball! That's on par with Carl's model! How many polygons you got so far?
Man, I don't think my graphics card can handle that! I can't wait to see more!!! order abortion pill abortion pill buy online where to buy abortion pillwhere to buy abortion pill ordering abortion pills to be shipped to house buy abortion pill online
OPEN SOURCE TRON PROJECT
"what the hell is a limux.."
- Gattorcar (a user on YouTube) April 17, 2007
test
|
Boingo_Buzzard
User
Posts: 0 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 10:51 AM
Neat. What program are you using?
|
Cueball
User
Posts: 155 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 10:54 AM
Mr. Sinistar Wrote:WHOA! Great job, Cueball! That's on par with Carl's model! How many polygons you got so far?
Man, I don't think my graphics card can handle that! I can't wait to see more!!! |
Hi!
Thank you for your comment!
I cant say it too often, but without the previous research
from Carl, Ed and other people, it would be much harder
to get that good results.
I can look at the polycount when im back home.
Ill go for a higher-poly-model because i try to avoid
edges/segmentation at the round parts which can be seen when you got too close.
Btw, on the orginal models, they build them out of primitives...
Does that mean, they discribed the parts as volumes,
not polygons?
So the smoothness of the round stuff would only limited trough
the screen-resolution?
I can take a closer look again, but im sure, i cant see any
segmentation or edges at the round parts of the cycle.
I hope i can finish the lightcyle this evening.
Dirk
|
wwwmwww
User
Posts: 1,230 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 3:50 PM
Cueball Wrote:
Btw, on the orginal models, they build them out of primitives...
Does that mean, they discribed the parts as volumes,
not polygons?
So the smoothness of the round stuff would only limited trough
the screen-resolution?
Dirk |
Yes...
Check out this article.
http://www.tron-sector.com/articles/article.aspx?ID=131
In this article it states "Each Lightcycle is composed of 57 geometric forms that have been combined by a solid-modeling program. Because they contain fewer basic elements, the cycles were easier to animate than are models created with polygons."
I've got it down to 54 primitives. For example here are the first 3 that make the front tire...
#declare front_tire = difference {
sphere {, 85} // 1 primitive
sphere {, 57.0742} // 2 primitives
sphere {, 57.0742} // 3 primitives
}
The first is the sphere that makes up the main shape of the front tire. It's centered at x=355, y=85, z=0 with a radius of 85. The other 2 spheres are subtracted from the first and form the cut out on both sides.
Hope this helps...
Yours looks great so far...
Carl
|
Cueball
User
Posts: 155 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 5:09 PM
Hi!
I got the cycle 99% done, but im not that happy with it,
because not everything worked the way i wanted it
@Carl:
Wow, thats plenty to read!
I really should check your cycle and see if i can understand
each primitive.
Then it would be no problem to "port" it over to Lightwave.
That would be really the most clean way to do it.
Anyway, here's what i got so far:
(12202 points, 11768 polys order abortion pill http://unclejohnsprojects.com/template/default.aspx?morning-after-pill-price where to buy abortion pill
|
wwwmwww
User
Posts: 1,230 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 6:02 PM
Cueball Wrote:Hi!
I got the cycle 99% done, but im not that happy with it,
because not everything worked the way i wanted it |
WOW!!! Looks great to me. I'm curious what you aren't happy with or what you think doesn't work.
Cueball Wrote:
@Carl:
Wow, thats plenty to read!
I really should check your cycle and see if i can understand
each primitive.
Then it would be no problem to "port" it over to Lightwave.
That would be really the most clean way to do it. |
If you want to do that I'll be happy to help. I probably won't be able to help much with the porting part but I should be able to help with the understanding part. If you have any questions about my POV-Ray code I'll do my best to answer them.
Cueball Wrote:
Anyway, here's what i got so far:
(12202 points, 11768 polys where to buy abortion pill http://blog.bitimpulse.com/template/default.aspx?abortion-types buy abortion pill online |
|
TheReelTodd
Sector Admin
Posts: 0 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 7:03 PM
Your light cycles look great, Cueball!
I love the style you rendered them in too - it looks very close to the soft-light look they had in the film.
Keep up the good work... and should we expect some animations in the future?
 
|
TheReelTodd
Sector Admin
Posts: 0 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 7:08 PM
wwwmwww Wrote:...At least in the early 80's it was easier to render and thus animate 57 primitives. If it's 57 primitives versus 11,768 polys I can easily understand why. However today that doesn't seem to be the case any more. I have to admite I'm curious why work with meshs has come so much farther then work with primitives in the last 20+ years.
Carl |
I think (not positive) that meshes evolved well beyond the use of primitives because they're so much more versatile. It's a lot easier to model with meshes (at least logically it seems so - I've never tried either). It still seems to me that the use of primitives would be far more efficient than their equivalent shapes in mesh form - it's a lot less processing power needed. But then again, meshes and primitives utilize two very different ways of reflecting light.
I'm guessing that the overall ease of meshes over primitives has caused this major shift away from the use of primitives and therefore there is not as many software engines developed around the rendering of primitives.
That's my guess anyway. It would be interesting to hear about this in depth from someone who knows a bit more about the whole thing and the advantages of both.
abortion pills online abortion pill online purchase cytotec abortion
|
wwwmwww
User
Posts: 1,230 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 8:27 PM
TheReelTodd Wrote:
I'm guessing that the overall ease of meshes over primitives has caused this major shift away from the use of primitives and therefore there is not as many software engines developed around the rendering of primitives.
|
Overall ease? Is it really easer to position 11,768 polys then it is 57 primitives. Being someone that's never made a mesh its hard for me to understand that but I tend to think it must be seeing how fast some of you can pump out these models. Then again I'm probably the Monk of model builders...
http://www.usanetwork.com/series/monk/
My take on things is that not only has mesh modeling advanced in great strides in the last 20+ years but that primitive modeling has taken a few steps backwards. For example in TRON they could easily outline primitives. Today if you want that ability you need to create your own ray tracer as Martin is doing. I think most of the drive behind this isn't so much the ease of working with meshs as it is the drive to get photo realistic images. In the real world rarely do we see perfect cylinders or spheres. Ask somone to model a tree with primitives and you have a problem. The subset of modelers that don't want photo realistic images but instead want an image that doesn't look like it could exist in this world is forced to play with the tools created for the other. I think in some ways we have less creative freedom with rendered images then we did 20+ years ago simply because so many want photo realistic. Didn't Lisberger say something along those lines himself, not sure where. As I recall his point was that back in 1982 he had the freedom to make the games look the way he wanted to inside the computer world. For example ask yourself what Pong would look like to a program and your free to come up with almost anything. Now ask yourself what Doom3 looks like to a program. Is there anything left to the imagination?
Carlorder abortion pill abortion pill buy online where to buy abortion pill
|
Traahn
User
Posts: 3,305 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 9:24 PM
wwwmwww, in Lightwave, you can visually build your shapes how you want them by stretching, pulling, bending, beveling, cutting, etc. I'm not sure how POV-Ray works, but when I tried it, it seems like you had to build polygons mathematically by X, Y and Z values, etc. You can do them mathematically in LW a bit, too... but that's not my style. I'm more of a visual person, so POV-Ray wasn't the best fit for me. I'm okay at math, so I'm sure I could've gotten it eventually or if that was the only tool around, but it just didn't seem like it'd have the intuitive use I was needing.
I built my recognizer in a night, but it's taken a lot of work to get to the point of being able to do that. I know there are other things I could've done differently to make it go even quicker; I just don't know them yet. I can imagine someone with lots of experience can crank out a Recognizer from scratch, in their sleep, within 10-20 minutes. I started working on a Grid Bug a couple weeks ago and had 70% of it done within an hour. Get one leg done, and you can copy/paste/rotate it three separate times to get 4 legs. Some of the details of the head were hard for me, in particular, to do -- so I kinda gave up, temporarily.
The learning curve of Lightwave is quite steep and I think 3DSMax is even steeper, but I keep plucking away at it every now and then. It's definitely been a struggle (and an investment), but it's been a very rewarding struggle/investment so far. There is so much more to learn with this program, I'm just scratching the surface, if that.
    
I'm getting out of here right now, and you guys are invited.   -----^
|
TronFAQ
Sector Admin
Posts: 4,467 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Wednesday, March, 22, 2006 11:05 PM
LDSO • Facebook • Twitter • YouTube • DeviantArt
|
Cueball
User
Posts: 155 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 2:43 AM
Hi!
I think both methods have their advantages,
but i think for pretty complex surfaces its easier to work with polygons.
In the good Amiga-times i gave Real3D a try, it worked with primitives too.
You could make the best glas-objects with it, because the calculation of its volume made it look the most real at this time.
But unfortunatly it was a real pain to use.
So i bought Videoscape3D (yes, i'm that old  )
http://www.lightwiki.com (History->Precusor)
Oki, just another quik-e-render:
 order abortion pill http://unclejohnsprojects.com/template/default.aspx?morning-after-pill-price where to buy abortion pill
|
Cueball
User
Posts: 155 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 7:12 AM
And another one:
|
wwwmwww
User
Posts: 1,230 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 8:01 AM
WOW!!! Did you do some work on the jet wall effect between the 2 images above? I can make out the vertical segments in the second image (atleast on the yellow wall) and I don't see them in the first.
Carl
|
Cueball
User
Posts: 155 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 8:37 AM
wwwmwww Wrote:WOW!!! Did you do some work on the jet wall effect between the 2 images above? I can make out the vertical segments in the second image (atleast on the yellow wall) and I don't see them in the first.
Carl |
Hi Carl!
Thanks, i like the image too.
But so to say, you are the real father of the cycle
Yes, i added the stripes, but i still need to tweak it a bit.
I took a look at your lightcycle and tried the frontwheel.
Pretty promissing, ill do a 2nd version based on primitives.
Some things in the povray-format are pretty much forward,
but i guess a will have a few questions later
Maybe i will render each primitive in povray,
pretty much work, but maybe it will help to visualize each part.
Btw, the stripes inside the wheels arent in the model, right?
Bye and thanks again,
Dirk
|
wwwmwww
User
Posts: 1,230 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 10:04 AM
Hello Dirk,
Cueball Wrote:
Thanks, i like the image too.
But so to say, you are the real father of the cycle
|
Boy does that make me feel old , but I honestly think that title should go to Syd.
Cueball Wrote:
I took a look at your lightcycle and tried the frontwheel.
Pretty promissing, ill do a 2nd version based on primitives.
Some things in the povray-format are pretty much forward,
but i guess a will have a few questions later
|
I'll be here.
Cueball Wrote:
Btw, the stripes inside the wheels arent in the model, right?
|
They aren't in the 54 primitive model I've posted here. In POV-Ray they are simple boxes so I guess they could be considered primitives 55 and 56. I've got them animated so they flash on and off between frames. Here check this out. It's the POV-Ray macro I created to draw my Light Cycle that I use in my animations.
http://www.wwwmwww.com/TRON/macro.pov
It's not a full scene file but it shows you how I draw the tire spokes.
Thanks and you are very welcome,
Carlwhere to buy abortion pill ordering abortion pills to be shipped to house buy abortion pill online
|
MCPcomputer
User
Posts: 1,945 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 4:16 PM
whoaa very nice light cycles program!
they are looking very nice...
"I want him in the games until he dies playing" -MCP 
The Grid a Physical Frontier funny Tron Videohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaMViP_QtZ8
|
zook_one
User
Posts: 278 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 4:50 PM
Yeah, for sure those new renderings are fantastic! I hope you are working towards the goal of creating a fan film or something cohesive. I think it would be awesome to see your guys skills put to the test of telling a story, no matter how short.
[LDSO] LIVING DEAD SYSTEM OPERATORS www.LDSO.net
|
TronFAQ
Sector Admin
Posts: 4,467 | Re: Just another lightcycle
on Thursday, March, 23, 2006 4:54 PM
LDSO • Facebook • Twitter • YouTube • DeviantArt
|
|