Hello,
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 03:52:18PM -0400, Paul Kienzle wrote:
# > # 2) How does the interface compare to the matlab VR toolkit? Is there any
# >
# > Less fancy and free.
# >
# > # point to trying to match their interface?
# >
# > I am not trying to match it. I don't know it but for a short
# > interaction a few years ago.
#
# Is there any point in trying to match it?
I don't know. Do many people use it? Not around me. A few people
played with it a little bit and that's it. Iirc, it was slowish.
# >
# > # 3) Are there alternative VR's to VRML?
# > ^
# > What's?
#
# Virtual Reality [Engines]
Vrml is not an engine. It is mostly a descriptive language that
specifies 3D geometry, a little bit like latex, but with less
computation capabilities still. Some browsers also allow scripting,
so that computations can be done, using java or perl.
# I was trying to answer two questions for myself: is there any difference from
# the octave users perspective between VRML and a 3D plot widget that supports
The basic functionalities are the same : display and examine. There
certainly are more sophisticated 3D visualization tool, e.g. for
examining clouds of points, functions of 3 parameters etc. Vrml may be
more adapted to build objects. I use it to display results of 3D
computer vision algorithms.
# changing view points and lighting, and are there any alternatives to VRML
# that might want the same interface for the octave user, but use a different
# modelling language underneath.
I know there exist other, but I don't know whether they use open
formats. Iirc, some ray tracers have a quick renderer which should do
more or less the same thing as a browser.
# The only reason I would care is that it would affect how things get installed
# in the future, and so it might affect where we install things now. For the
# moment, how about you put it under main/vrml, and worry about conflicts when
# things are more developed.
#
# - Paul
Cheers,
Etienne
--
Etienne Grossmann ------ http://www.isr.ist.utl.pt/~etienne
|
