From ernst@kwetal.ms.mff.cuni.cz Tue May 26 12:29:18 1998 Received: from burdell.cc.gatech.edu (root@burdell.cc.gatech.edu [130.207.3.207]) by lennon.cc.gatech.edu (8.8.4/8.6.9) with ESMTP id MAA26768 for ; Tue, 26 May 1998 12:28:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wheaten.hitl.washington.edu (zg+j4IMeHWNUcSJxN7PNRhkiz8WaFEq1@[128.95.73.60]) by burdell.cc.gatech.edu (8.8.4/8.6.9) with ESMTP id MAA26782 for ; Tue, 26 May 1998 12:27:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from relay.accu.uu.nl (relay.cc.ruu.nl [131.211.16.32]) by wheaten.hitl.washington.edu (8.8.8/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA26983 for <3d-ui@hitl.washington.edu>; Tue, 26 May 1998 09:27:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hydra.cc.ruu.nl (hydra.cc.ruu.nl [131.211.16.28]) by relay.accu.uu.nl (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA43494 for <3d-ui@hitl.washington.edu>; Tue, 26 May 1998 18:27:48 +0200 Received: from pop.cc.ruu.nl (hydra.cc.ruu.nl [131.211.16.28]) by hydra.cc.ruu.nl (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA81046 for <3d-ui@hitl.washington.edu>; Tue, 26 May 1998 18:27:34 +0200 Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:27:34 +0200 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19970426182322.349730dc@pop.cc.ruu.nl> X-Sender: l9339493@pop.cc.ruu.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: 3d-ui@hitl.washington.edu From: Ernst Kruijff Subject: extremely hungry for polygons and texels Status: RO >> On a semi-technical point, my experience with artists working in VR is >> that they are extremely hungry for polygons and texels. > >In my experience, the best artists understand the constraints of the medium >that they're working in, whether they work in watercolor, oil, polygons, or >pixels. It is certainly an difficult skill to acquire but not an impossible >one. I don't agree with either of you, I am afraid. I experience, and so do many other artists and architects, that simple primitives (low polygon count) and NO texels work very well in some design processes. If you consider conceptual design tools (CDS, JDCAD and so on), users do not start with using highly detailed primitives and texels. If you consider the approximate modeling time with HMD based modeling tools - approximately 30 to 45 minutes - you don't have time for advanced editing. There is not even a high need to allow textures and advanced deformation of forms during conceptual modeling - non-realism is often needed. That is also why tools like Sketch use non-realistic rendering techniques. Modeling for presentation purposes indeed requires a high amount of polygons and texels - in that case, you are right. >Perhaps the >> current top machines can deliver the desired performance for some >> projects, but I doubt it. My point is that steady-state scene >> rendering >> hogs all the resources, and transitions cause a doubling in resource >> use. > >Another law of VR: VR always runs at 10 frames per second. As soon as a >bottleneck is removed so as to raise the frame rate above 10 fps (a faster >machine, better graphics card, etc.) authors will raise the amount of >content (more characters, more polygons, more textures, more animations....) >so as to lower the frame rate to the breaking point again. The question is, to which point do people want to go to the max?? Conceptual design tools will benefit from machine improvements to allow rendering of shadows, for instance. However, I don't see it happen that people are going to use massive textures in conceptual design... In this case, improvements WILL lead to higher fps. -Ernst .................. Ernst Kruijff ................. Westersingel 9 .............. 4101 ZG Culemborg ................ The Netherlands ................ (0)345 - 519397 .. e.p.c.kruijff@stud.let.ruu.nl .... ernst@kwetal.ms.mff.cuni.cz .. kwetal.ms.mff.cuni.cz/~ernst/