[geeks] re: oh man

[Joshua D Boyd]

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:33:04PM +0100, roosmcd at dds.nl wrote:
> >> > http://download.watch.impress.co.jp/pc/2002/1120/kaigai1_3.mpg
> >> > 
> >> > That is amazing stuff.  
> >? 
> >>  http://www.fx2.se/showreel/showreel_2002_divx.avi
> >
> >OK, downloaded and viewed it.  But, how much of it is done in real time?
> >How much of it is pure CG?  And why does Adobe seem to want to say that
> >After Effects was used?
> 
>  I don't really know much about this, it was only stated that 90% of it was 
> done with an Onyx2 (2p R10-195). I recently watched the video and
> thought the geforceFX video wasn't so spectacular :).

It is a fairly sure bet that all of their work is either realtime 2D,
like the Inferno (I don't know what would be on an Onyx since most of
effects programs seem to be specific to a particular machine, and
everything else I know of is either O2 specific or Octane specific), or
else slowly rendered 3D using conventional rendering stuff.  Which is
fine.  However while I've never seen a infinite reality or better do
stuff like that GeforceFX video in real time.

That said, this doesn't mean the IR systems can't do it, just that I
haven't seen it.  It may be that people are too busy doing either sloppy
stuff (i.e. research institutions who bought an Onyx so they could focus
on ideas rather than optimization) or business stuff.

A major issue for people using PC level hardware is limiting redraws.
One of the major benefits of the GeforceFX is that the longer programs
mean you can do much more with only one drawing pass.  In fact, from the
sounds of it, the pixie in that video consists of 3 shaders only, which
to my understanding means 3 passes.  

Infinite Reality graphics, on the other hand, seems to be quite happy
doing numerous passes.  So, that helps tremendously with implementing
pixel shaders in software.  Further, I would expect that with that many
good CPUs, you wouldn't have too much trouble not needing vertex
shaders.  But I don't know any of this for sure since no one seems to do
this stuff.  I would do it, if I had ready acces to an Onyx, and more
time (or more convienient access to an Onyx than close to 2 hours away
for a RE2 machine).

As to the Adobe After Effects remark, Adobe.se has a page about that
video and after effects, but I can't read it.
 
> >>  Onyx2 1 - GeForceFX 0.
> >
> >I know that the Onyx line has a lot of geometry power, but they seem to
> >be emphasizing raw transformation power rather than programability.
> 
>  The Onyx2 is much bigger (the standard in PC graphics since 3Dfx) and looks 
> way cooler :). Take a look at the Developer's Toolbox for information, there 
> are also a couple of nice Onyx2 demos you can try on your GForce. They also 
> have "From space into your face" up for download. Damn, I need to get
> an Onyx!  

The developers toolbox seems to require an account of some sort.  I read
as many SGI papers as I can.  They are usually interesting.  I wish I
had more time for implementing some of the ideas.  I keep signing up,
but they keep expiring my accounts quickly.  I don't think I've bothered
in the past two years now, and I'm sure things have changed a lot in
that time.  I guess I'll fill out another one.

-- 
Joshua D. Boyd