gdalgorithms-list

Re: [GDAlgorithms-List] Re: [Algorithms] Message format

[Pierre T. <p.t...@wa...>]

...then why not the good ol' [Algorithms] ...?

----- Original Message -----
From: gl <gl...@nt...>
To: <gda...@li...>
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2000 2:46 AM
Subject: Re: [GDAlgorithms-List] Re: [Algorithms] Message format


>
> I'm doing this publically Tom to get a consensus (or otherwise).  Can we
> change the subject list title to be shorter?  Right now it eats too much
> subject real-estate.
>
> I suggest simply [GDAlgos-List], and if poss. drop the GD too.  It might
not
> seem like much, but it matters to me (opinions?).
> --
> gl
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Hubina" <to...@3d...>
> To: "Algorithms List" <alg...@3d...>
> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 11:22 PM
> Subject: [GDAlgorithms-List] Re: [Algorithms] Message format
>
>
> > At 09:43 AM 7/14/2000 -0700, you wrote:
> > >There has been some kind of breakdown of message formatting since
moving
> the
> > >list to the new host.
> > >
> > >I read the list on two different mail readers from two diffferent
sites.
> > >One is Outlook Express the other Forte Agent.  Since the changeover of
> the
> > >list host, the messages have been all but unreadable on Outlook
Express,
> and
> > >they were perfectly OK before.  The header information, author, subject
> etc.
> > >are all blank where they used to appear, but the entire header
> information ,
> > >including all which used to be hidden,
> > >   is in the body of the message.
> > >
> > >Also I get lots of  "=20"s at the end of lines and whole lines of
"=20"s
> at
> > >the end of
> > >
> > >This makes the whole list practically unusable from the site where I
use
> > >Outlook Express.
> > >
> > >Interestingly, there is no change in the way the messages are presented
> in
> > >Forte Agent.
> >
> >  From what I can tell, the temp server that was in place had garbled
> > headers. The SourceForge stuff seems to be working correctly. If anyone
> has
> > a problem with a message with the new list name in the title, please let
> me
> > know at to...@3d...
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> > GDA...@li...
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list

Re: [GDAlgorithms-List] Re: [Algorithms] Message format

[gl <gl...@nt...>]

I'm doing this publically Tom to get a consensus (or otherwise).  Can we
change the subject list title to be shorter?  Right now it eats too much
subject real-estate.

I suggest simply [GDAlgos-List], and if poss. drop the GD too.  It might not
seem like much, but it matters to me (opinions?).
--
gl

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Hubina" <to...@3d...>
To: "Algorithms List" <alg...@3d...>
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 11:22 PM
Subject: [GDAlgorithms-List] Re: [Algorithms] Message format


> At 09:43 AM 7/14/2000 -0700, you wrote:
> >There has been some kind of breakdown of message formatting since moving
the
> >list to the new host.
> >
> >I read the list on two different mail readers from two diffferent sites.
> >One is Outlook Express the other Forte Agent.  Since the changeover of
the
> >list host, the messages have been all but unreadable on Outlook Express,
and
> >they were perfectly OK before.  The header information, author, subject
etc.
> >are all blank where they used to appear, but the entire header
information ,
> >including all which used to be hidden,
> >   is in the body of the message.
> >
> >Also I get lots of  "=20"s at the end of lines and whole lines of  "=20"s
at
> >the end of
> >
> >This makes the whole list practically unusable from the site where I use
> >Outlook Express.
> >
> >Interestingly, there is no change in the way the messages are presented
in
> >Forte Agent.
>
>  From what I can tell, the temp server that was in place had garbled
> headers. The SourceForge stuff seems to be working correctly. If anyone
has
> a problem with a message with the new list name in the title, please let
me
> know at to...@3d...
>
> Tom
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>

Re: [GDAlgorithms-List] Algorithms archives

[Tom H. <to...@3d...>]

At 03:45 PM 7/14/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>Are all the old messages going to be moved to the sourceforge archive?
>
>  I notice the old mailing list web archive no longer works, and the new web
>archive is incomplete. It contains a note letting me know that the archive
>is not yet available, and to check back in 24 hours.
>
>I would like to see the old messages transported to the new list since I'm
>new to Algorithms list and it was nice to be able to go back and read old
>threads, especially since you could search for a specific topic to see if it
>had been discussed before, rather than bringing up an old topic that had
>already been trampled to death before.

Once the list itself is stable and messages are flowing without 
complication I'm going to turn my focus towards getting all the archives 
merged and put up on SourceForge.

Tom

[GDAlgorithms-List] Algorithms archives

[Ceschi, B. <Ben...@br...>]

Are all the old messages going to be moved to the sourceforge archive?

 I notice the old mailing list web archive no longer works, and the new web
archive is incomplete. It contains a note letting me know that the archive
is not yet available, and to check back in 24 hours. 

I would like to see the old messages transported to the new list since I'm
new to Algorithms list and it was nice to be able to go back and read old
threads, especially since you could search for a specific topic to see if it
had been discussed before, rather than bringing up an old topic that had
already been trampled to death before.

> Ben

[GDAlgorithms-List] Re: [Algorithms] Message format

[Tom H. <to...@3d...>]

At 09:43 AM 7/14/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>There has been some kind of breakdown of message formatting since moving the
>list to the new host.
>
>I read the list on two different mail readers from two diffferent sites.
>One is Outlook Express the other Forte Agent.  Since the changeover of the
>list host, the messages have been all but unreadable on Outlook Express, and
>they were perfectly OK before.  The header information, author, subject etc.
>are all blank where they used to appear, but the entire header information ,
>including all which used to be hidden,
>   is in the body of the message.
>
>Also I get lots of  "=20"s at the end of lines and whole lines of  "=20"s at
>the end of
>
>This makes the whole list practically unusable from the site where I use
>Outlook Express.
>
>Interestingly, there is no change in the way the messages are presented in
>Forte Agent.

 From what I can tell, the temp server that was in place had garbled 
headers. The SourceForge stuff seems to be working correctly. If anyone has 
a problem with a message with the new list name in the title, please let me 
know at to...@3d...

Tom

[GDAlgorithms-List] RE:

[Steve W. <Ste...@im...>]

> From: Kirk Hammond <kha...@to...>
> Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 16:27:23 -0400
> 
> This has been something I have mulled for some time.  What _really_
> denotes scale in a 3D engine?  I currently run a ROAM based terrain
> engine with units like tanks, planes, yada yada.  Obviously 
> the scale of
> objects moving by the viewer affects the perception of speed 
> and size of
> a world unit.
> 
> So, this would lead one to believe that as long as you are consistent
> with your units (as I am), then everything would be fine.  And indeed,
> if I put a 2000 m cruiser in space and fly in a ship at 200 
> m/s it takes
> 10 sec to fly by the ship.  Fine and dandy.
> 
> But... something about this just doesn't seem correct.  I saw 
> a previous
> thread on this but I still think I need someone to shed some light on
> this for me...
> 
> (e.g. if you have in the same 3D engine the view from an ant on the
> ground and a view from a human walking above...  aren't there viewport
> changes from the two vantages beyond moving the camera around and the
> fact that the camera is higher above the ground on the human?  I mean,
> if the human stuck his eye on the ground level with the ant's 
> viewpoint,
> doesn't the human still see more of the terrain than does the ant?)
> 
> -kirk
> 

Kirk,

Other than determining what texture size is large enough so that up close it
won't get too grainy and small enough so it won't slow the engine down, I
think this is something that we all "play" with until it "looks" right.
Thankfully we only have to find a familiar perpective and the geometry
pipline will make the world at that scale.

Personally, I used a grid pattern of 1 unit squares for a floor, then placed
a 8 cubit unit square box (2 units per side) on it and placed a optimal 256k
bitmap on each side that included text (Front, Back, Left, Right, Top,
bottom), then using cameraview stepped back from it, up to it, around it,
and looked over it until I decided what that size means to me...if I didn't
like it then I tweaked my pipeline with a different viewport and/or changed
the speed at which I can move the cameraview around until it felt real and
the box looked real.

Hmm, now that you mention it the size WOULD be relative. To me one unit in
my engine represents roughly 5' cause I'm 6' tall and my eyes line up with
the text on the box which is located .2 units above the centerline.
However, if someone about 4' tall (about 20% of target audience) was playing
the game then they would think it's smaller...say 1 unit = 3.3'. If an ant
was playing the game (I think anyone can get a credit card these days) then
it would think it was like .1". There isn't that much of a difference
between 4' and 6' until you get up close, and you mind will probably make up
the difference far away.

R&R

[GDAlgorithms-List] RE:

[Philip T. <pt...@mi...>]

IIRC D3DRENDERSTATE_ZVISIBLE is valid with ExecuteBuffers.

I would hazard a guess its still defined in the header files because you can
still use DX3 interfaces and EBs. Not recommended,but possible. And still
the only support on NT4 SP3.

-----Original Message-----
From: er...@3d... [mailto:er...@3d...]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 11:47 AM
Subject: 


 by "Algorithms List" <do...@3d...>

 with SMTP id <D0000005118.OUT>; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 10:52:56 -0700

Received: from mta03-svc.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.43] by mail.800hosting.com
with ESMTP
  (SMTPD32-5.05) id A5B520870242; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 13:02:29 -0500
Received: from ultraviolet ([62.254.9.22]) by mta03-svc.ntlworld.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.02.27 201-229-119-110) with SMTP
          id <20000714175722.YAM16423.mta03-svc.ntlworld.com@ultraviolet>
          for <alg...@3d...>; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 18:57:22 +0100
Message-ID: <00c101bfedbc$f5bc5be0$8c00a8c0@ultraviolet>
From: "gl" <gl...@nt...>
To: "Algorithms" <alg...@3d...>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 18:57:21 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-RCPT-TO: <alg...@3d...>
X-UIDL: 3728
Status: U
List-Server: DOLIST Server Expert 3.4 B1999
 More information <http://www.dolist.net>
List-Help: <mailto:do...@3d...?body=help%20algorithms>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:do...@3d...?body=leave%20algorithms>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:do...@3d...?body=join%20algorithms>
List-Post: <mailto:alg...@3d...>
List-Owner: <mailto:lis...@3d...>
List-Archive:
<mailto:do...@3d...?body=search%20algorithms%20date%202000-07-14>
List-Info: Algorithms List
X-Tracking: #alg...@3d...#
X-DOLIST-Unsubscribe: To leave, send 'leave algorithms' to
'do...@3d...'
Subject: Re: [Algorithms] 
Resent-From: alg...@3d...
Errors-To: er...@3d...
Return-Path: er...@3d...
Reply-To: "Algorithms List" <alg...@3d...>

> Well my geometry is usually very complex and multi-textured. I'm using D3D
> for a 3D software package and not a game, so the user may have extremelly
> large datasets with lots of quality per mesh which might not even be seen.
> Therefore, I would be flushing the pipeline, but in turn might save from
> updating higher res animated textures, from performing bump-mapping
routines
> or any other complex material shader algo, from sending large amounts of
> textures or geometry to the card... Much work may be saved. So that's
> kindoff why I'm trying to weigh the pros and cons of this. But I see
> ZVISSIBLE is not supported right? Still in D3D but not supported, why
don't
> they yank it out then, they must still think their is hope because it's
> still in DX8 but still unsupported...

(Outlook Express header hell...)

Yep, it's one of those imponderables.  Tony (if you're listening), why
exactly is ZVISIBLE still around?  If it worked, I'd use it of course, but
as it stands ...
--
gl


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
To unsubscribe from this list, send an e-mail to
"do...@3d..." with the following body:

leave algorithms

Web Archives of this list can be found at:
http://216.101.212.117/cgi/doweb.exe?list=algorithms
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

[GDAlgorithms-List] Re: [Algorithms] Scale, camera, and world units and how it affects perception

[Patrick E. H. <hu...@tr...>]

>fact that the camera is higher above the ground on the human?  I mean,
>if the human stuck his eye on the ground level with the ant's viewpoint,
>doesn't the human still see more of the terrain than does the ant?)

No.  You can realistically get your eye down to hound-dog level though by
laying flat out on the ground, ants way too low for a good example.

This is why all Hollywood special effects done with miniature models work
OK and the resulting shot doesn't look horribly out of place..

[GDAlgorithms-List] Re: [Algorithms] Scale, camera, and world units and how it affects perception

[Michael S. H. <mic...@in...>]

This can easily get WAY off topic for this list, but given your example below, no.  The ant will see more of the terrain because of the placement and nature of his eyes.  He won't see more because of where he is (assuming that placement doesn't make much difference), but rather because of how he sees.

At 04:27 PM 7/14/00, you wrote:
>This has been something I have mulled for some time.  What _really_
>denotes scale in a 3D engine?  I currently run a ROAM based terrain
>engine with units like tanks, planes, yada yada.  Obviously the scale of
>objects moving by the viewer affects the perception of speed and size of
>a world unit.
>
>So, this would lead one to believe that as long as you are consistent
>with your units (as I am), then everything would be fine.  And indeed,
>if I put a 2000 m cruiser in space and fly in a ship at 200 m/s it takes
>10 sec to fly by the ship.  Fine and dandy.
>
>But... something about this just doesn't seem correct.  I saw a previous
>thread on this but I still think I need someone to shed some light on
>this for me...
>
>(e.g. if you have in the same 3D engine the view from an ant on the
>ground and a view from a human walking above...  aren't there viewport
>changes from the two vantages beyond moving the camera around and the
>fact that the camera is higher above the ground on the human?  I mean,
>if the human stuck his eye on the ground level with the ant's viewpoint,
>doesn't the human still see more of the terrain than does the ant?)
>
>-kirk
>
>
>
>
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>To unsubscribe from this list, send an e-mail to
>"do...@3d..." with the following body:
>
>leave algorithms
>
>Web Archives of this list can be found at:
>http://216.101.212.117/cgi/doweb.exe?list=algorithms
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 

[GDAlgorithms-List] New List

[Tom H. <to...@3d...>]

If everyone seems to get this email I'll be setting up the 
alg...@3d... address to forward emails to the new address at 
GDA...@li.... That should make replies to old 
emails end up on the new list. Everyone will need to adjust their mail 
filters to pick up the new list topics and To: fields and people who used 
to receive digests will need to reset themselves with the new list.

I'm sure there will be a few minor configuration changes over the next day 
or two, but hopefully they will resolve themselves quickly. After that I'll 
work with the SourceForge people to get the complete archives (I still have 
every email ever sent to this list) up and sorted properly. Thank you for 
you understanding, and hopefully we'll have a very clean, robust list 
server very shortly!

Tom

[GDAlgorithms-List] Heya

[Jeff M. <jef...@gi...>]

I want to finish Project 23


Jeff Myers
Gibbs and Associates
Software Developer
je...@Gi...