Re: [Dev-C++] openrt

[<or...@vp...>]

Astar wrote:
> I mean that it needs __specific__ hardware. I don't think that gamers
> (or other end-consumers) want to buy one more $0000000 cards.
> ok! it usefull for 3d modelling, but we have Quadro cards from NV, and
> i don't think that NVidia agree to miss this sphere.

Well, this is going to be loooooooong.......
So... When 3dfx first introduced hardware supported 3d for consumers 
(us, gamers), then there was NO alternative, i.e.: it was __specific__
BUT: later came nVidia, ATI, etc. Other companies will produce hardware 
too for ray-tracing.

> and I want to remind you that main power of D3D/OGL are its powerfull
> tools (Cg, CgFX ), tons of documentation, lots of seminars and other
> teaching stuff.

OpenRT has better shader support - OGL shading is a hack, while 
ray-tracer shaders are trivial. For example: OGL shadows are a hack, and 
they also look crappy, and slow. While ray-traced shadows are accurate, 
and easier to write shaders for them.
OpenRT has the EXACT same syntax, as OpenGL (hence the name)

> OB> OpenRT needs hardware support, just like OpenGL does. Have you ever 
> OB> tried OpenGL in software mode? It produces less than 1 FPS...
> 
> Yeah! We play to Quake II in software mode (640x480)... ~20-30fps on
> very "weak" computers....

No, No, NO!!!
Quake II HAS a software renderer separately. I meant software EMULATION 
of OpenGL.

> OB> Trust me, OpenGL will quickly (2-4 years) become obsolete. The future is 
> OB> interactive ray-tracing.
> 
> :)) may be GL2 (GLslang) helps as?

It is still rasterization based - i.e.: SLOW, hack
You can wax out a 50 year old russian car to look good, but when you see 
an Aston Martin (or anything better), then you will probably switch...

> ok! some screenshots for you. Realtime. Without any specific (i mean
> you don't need buy something else) hardware.

I DON'T NEED A 3D CARD AT ALL???????
You are probably jokeing.... - or you are a bit uninformed...

But anyway, those screens are still not REAL enough - the trees are 
still made with transparent polygons, while what I showed, there EVERY 
LITTLE STICK IS MODELLED...
Tell me when is it going to be in OpenGL - but try to do it in this 
century....

There are huge differences between rasterization based rendering and 
ray-tracing, that I'm *NOT* going to explain now. The fact is, that 
OpenGL is getting a bit old... New technologies come, just wait a few 
year to see the results...

Sad, but true: ray-tracing is faster for large scenes, generates 
way-better image quality, has automatic occlusion-culling (because of 
the algorithm), AND requires less hardware resources... than OpenGL

--
Greetings,
   Balázs