Moonlight|3D 0.5.5 Released 180
oxygene2k2 writes "I just finished the release preparations for Moonlight|3D 0.5.5. "Moonlight?" you might think, taking a look at slashdot's nice search function and see that there are two articles from 2000 claiming that it's dead. It's alive again and this release was made to show this. We hope to attract both users and developers with this. Take a look at the Release Announcement for the Mailinglist, our development site and the press releases in english, german,
french,
italian and
spanish."
what the hell is it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:what the hell is it? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:what the hell is it? (Score:4, Informative)
From the development page [sourceforge.net]:
Hmmm... (Score:1)
Yea, right.
Re:Hmmm... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Hmmm... (Score:2)
What do you mean reboot?
KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah! Who needs choice? Screw that shit!
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:1)
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:3, Informative)
You misunderstood. Let me elaborate further.
Since developers allocate time out of their schedules and donate their skills (for free) to a project that powers the engine which essentially drives the open source movement. Blender3d was just freed. It's not a perfect 3d Modeling Suite by any means. It will be months, even years before it can reach the same playing field where discreet and Alias dominate the game.
Moonlight project was killed. Seems to me we got a negative charge within the OSS community where they try to counter each and every project with a similar initiative, and in turn it just divides the developers into two camps and never gives edge to a single one.
Suppose someone countered MS Exchange with an Open Source solution. I bet 3 days later there would be 2 different open source projects on freshmeat in a competition. Why? The first one isn't perfect yet!
To me the logical step would be to perfect something first, rather than have 2 half assed-solutions.
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:2)
Yeah. And it's weird how, like, negative forces in politics cause all these different parties to emerge, dividing politicians into two camps and not giving an edge to either one. Obviously, the next logical step is to elect me as your SUPREME LEADER.
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:2)
Seems to me we got a negative charge within the OSS community where they try to counter each and every project with a similar initiative, and in turn it just divides the developers into two camps and never gives edge to a single one.
See, your whole premise seems to be based upon the assumption that there's One Right Way to do things. If there was, yes. It would make more sense to have everybody working on a single project rather than competing ones.
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:2)
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:1)
but can't, don't need choice. We need something that works.
Dividing attention is not going to help is. However, I do understand
why it satisfies developers and software architecture techno-freaks.
If you just want to play, go ahead. If you want total world
domination, choice just reared its ugly head one more time.
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:2, Insightful)
Windows is designed for comformity. And since you appear to be a big fan of conformity and all that it entails (lack of choice, no personal expression allowed.. art == bad etc.) please stay where you are and where you belong.
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:3, Interesting)
because... (Score:5, Informative)
Best of luck to the Moonlight 3d team! Its a spiffy little app with a nice interface and plenty of potential!
Re:because... (Score:2)
pictures of modelled objects, right?
Re:because... (Score:5, Informative)
pictures of modelled objects, right?
Well, not necessarily (game modelers for instance don't make pretty pictures) but I'll see if I can explain myself a bit better about why these two approaches are so very different (and somewhat developmentally incompatible).
In the end that is the idea but there are many ways to skin a cat (or even a mesh).
Also some other differences between Blender and Moonlight.
Moonlight 3D is more geared towards ease of use and to help newbies ease themselves into 3D w/a nice UI and basic modeling funtions.
Blender is currently geared towards the more experienced 3D artist with an ultra efficient UI (with a steeper learning curve) and a professional workflow that enables you to output tons of work easily (sometimes at the price of user friendliness).
These are two very different crowds that Moonlight and Blender are catering to. I think there's room enough in Free Software for them both.
Re:because... (Score:2)
If it's so good, why haven't real professional tools like Maya and Lightwave copied the interface?
Re:because... (Score:2)
Ok, point taken. However, I *can* list several methods of implementation with respect to Blender's UI that cannot rationally be considered 'efficient', by any means. After using Blender for as long as I have, I've come to believe that Blender has a split personality - while some aspects do provide for some level of efficiency, there are others that do quite the opposite, thus making any overall advantage a wash. I consider Blender to be "usable but difficult." You can produce some fairly decent material with it, if you're willing to deal with the headaches.
Re:because... (Score:2)
Yes, it's excellent work. One wonders what exnihilo might have to say about the difficulties encountered while constructing the model. Do you know if he is still using Blender?
Blender is a very flexible and cleverly conceived modeler. This allows you use Blender in unconventional ways and helps make up for features that may not be directly built into Blender (or any other modeler for that matter).
What specifically are you referring to?
t will be interesting to see how many production houses will start using Blender once it matures a bit more.
Interesting indeed.
Re:because... (Score:3, Interesting)
When asked why (especially considering the cost of a lot of the software involved - ouch!) they respond that different tools are designed for different purposes. I'd think that actual professional graphics artists who want to switch to Linux on the desktop would more appreciate a choice than being told to pigeon-hole themselves into a single tool.
Re:because... (Score:5, Insightful)
Best of luck to the Moonlight 3d team! Its a spiffy little app with a nice interface and plenty of potential!
As a Blender fan (who has purchased books from NaN in the past and donated some money toward freeing the source) I can only agree.
My hope is that any and all of the free 3d modelling and rendering projects will get together on the data side, either using standards (e.g. renderman format) or agreeing on a common format to use as a lingua franca. Ideally one should be able to do portions of their project in Blender, portions in povray, portions in Moonlight 3D, and so on. If history is any guide, each of these projects will have its strengths and weaknesses, and allowing them all to interact (at least at the data level) smoothly would be a huge boon to all of the projects in question.
Of course, having them all be able to provide 'expert components' for their areas of strength to some kind of a meta (or ueber) 3d authoring suite is probably too much to ask at this stage, but not too much to dream of and perhaps work toward down the road.
Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (Score:2)
Blender has potential, but nearly everything about it is non-standard. It certainly incorporates some nice ideas, but in an off-center sort of way. It would be great if the mojo in the modeling community at large could move it more toward the center. Whether or not that happens, choice and diversity of ideas is a good thing.
Alive after two years (Score:5, Funny)
Ow, I bruised my bandwidth!
What. Is. It. (Score:5, Insightful)
You're joking, right?
How hard is it to say "Moonlight, the window manager", or "Moonlight, the animated series", or "Moonlight, the new journalling file system" in these posts?
I don't even bother clicking these links because the server is going to be buried anyway.
..another waste of posting space
Re:What. Is. It. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What. Is. It. (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, '3d' is a buzzword that can be applied to just about any craptacular thing to make it that much l33ter, and there were no replies posted when I began my post.
Anyways, I'm commenting on a general trend of slashdork news posts. A relatively high percentage of posts are like this, talking about something which I'm sure is obvious if you're on the mailing list (In which case you probably heard about it a week ago), but for lack of two extra words of description, means nothing to me.
Half the time, the link is to some cryptic page on Sourceforge where I'd still have to spend 5 minutes poking around to figure out wtf the thing is, and the other half it's a link to some poor unsuspecting server that's going to be crushed within 10 seconds of the post making the front page.
"Moonlight3D 0.3.21.5, a 3D modelling package for Linux" would have been so much clearer, and may have saved who knows how much bandwidth for people who would then say 'hm, not interested in that', and gone about their business rather than clicking the link to find out what the 'story' was about.
Re:What. Is. It. (Score:1)
Re:What. Is. It. (Score:2)
Here's a simple solution that will save you time and energy: Stop trying to figure out what these things are. It's not like there's a gun to your head.
Re:What. Is. It. (Score:2, Insightful)
Another solution, put forth by slashbots every time a reader has some issue with the editorial staff (and this issue is with the editors, as while they (claim to) have no control over the poster's submitted story, they should do their editorial duty and clarify these kinds of things when the original submitter does not), is, "Don't read the site," or, "Go read something else if you don't like it." While that is a valid suggestion and possibly even a viable solution, it's rather short-sighted. What in fact that suggestion is doing is filtering out anybody who may like the site but for a few small problems with the editorial staff. Rather than letting those people be heard (and then likely moderated into oblivion, and certainly just plain ignored by the editors), the slashbots advocate, "Our way or the highway." With all the talk of monocultures being bad that's been heard on Slashdot (re: operating systems, medical advances, hardware, music, and so on), it is rather surprising that the same readers would suggest that Slashdot should be its own monoculture.
"Love it or leave it," is a very childish attitude. However, I won't stoop to the same level. Keep advocating that attitude if you like. See what happens to Slashdot if the minority voices decide to leave. Maybe it'll mean less bitching and whining, but in the long run it also means stagnation.
Re:What. Is. It. (Score:2)
I think boycotting Slashdot because they post articles about software without telling you what the software does is a lot more childish than just ignoring such posts and enjoying the stuff you're actually interested in. But hey, that's just me.
Re:What. Is. It. (Score:2, Interesting)
First, note that I didn't say to boycott Slashdot. I simply said that a lot of slashbots think, "If you don't like it, shut up and leave," is a good solution to the "problem" of people thinking that the editors should actually do the job of editing story submissions. Second, it's a little difficult to know whether you're interested in reading an article if the Slashdot story description isn't good enough to even let you know what the article is about. Therefore, you have to read the article to figure out whether or not you want to read the article. Sounds kinda stupid, doesn't it? Or, I guess we could just take your approach and ignore any story that isn't sufficiently verbose enough to let us determine whether or not we want to invest time in reading the article. Ignorance is bliss, or so they say.
Re:What. Is. It. (Score:2)
It's a little silly to turn this into a big issue. I think it's hilarious when people demand perfection from sites like Slashdot. People don't seem to realize that Slashdot is nothing more than editorial brain-wanking. Most of the editors could care less whether or not the readers are interested in something; all that matters is that the editors themselves are interested. If you want it the other way around, I suggest you take a look at Kuro5hin [kuro5hin.org].
Re:What. Is. It. (Score:2)
Been there, done that, found it too pretentious. Oh, sure I still visit there, but the politics there generally don't mesh with mine (a majority of Kuro5hiners seem to be left-wingers, hippies, or socialists -- maybe not a fair judgement, but that's what I've come up with based on the average article written over there), which means I find very little interesting to read over there. Add into that the general slowness of the site lately, and it's just not a good alternative for me.
Slashdot is decent right now. There are one or two interesting stories a day, and aside from the daily MySQL wonkiness, I never have any connection problems. In my mind, there are only two things holding Slashdot back -- The editors, and the commenters (what, you say? that's the whole site? damn). The editors, because they need to actually do what their job title says -- edit. Fix typos, remove unwarranted bias and Microsoft bashing. Summarize an article where the poster didn't. Some editors are better than others, but that can't make up for the bad ones. The users, because of the rampant trolling and "My way or the highway" intolerant attitudes. But, nothing can really be done about the users, so I don't bother ragging there. The editors on the other hand ...
Then again, as you say, Slashdot is nothing more than editorial brain-wanking. And that's okay (except when Slashdot tries to present itself as something other than that, which is the whole point -- Slashdot tries to present themselves as a professional, important Geek news clearinghouse, except when their methods are called into question, at which point they're suddenly "Rob's personal site that just happens to enjoy an immensely huge popularity at the moment"). My posts, then, are also a similar kind of masturbation.
Description? (Score:3, Insightful)
Moonlight 3D. It's obviously related to 3D in some way. Is it a modeller, raytracing engine, game, scientific 3D analysis, 3D star map maybe? Give one sentence at least. Don't make me go read the damn article to figure out if I'm even interested in reading about it.
Now I've gone an had to follow the link to find out it's a modeller/renderer. You couldn't say "Moonlight 3D modeller/renderer released"?
Re:Description? (Score:5, Insightful)
Or "Mozilla"? Or "350Z"
Don't whine about a lack of descriptive names in OSS. They're everywhere.
Re:Description? (Score:2)
Re:Description? (Score:3, Interesting)
Konqueror - those krazy KDE folKs.
Blender - about as descriptive as moonlight.
Mozilla - I don't understand this one at all.
And some closed-source weird names:
Excel - Maybe a spreadsheet has X number of cells?
Visio - almost as weird as Mozilla
Visual Studio...sounds like a paint program.
I think its all about what sounds good. For instance, my name is John, which is not as descriptive as "Overweight geek" but definitely sounds better.
Re:Description? (Score:2)
I agree, the names are chosen because they sound good. And MS names are no better in terms of describing what the product is.
What some people don't seem to understand if that when you decide to publish a piece about a software program that was declared dead 2 years ago, and never made it out of beta, maybe you should mention a little more than just the name of the package.
Re:Description? (Score:3, Funny)
I respectfully disagree.
windows
Re:Description? (Score:1)
Re:Description? (Score:2)
What would we call all the office suites?
The KDE Office Suite, the Gnome Office Suite, the Sun Office suite, with apps in them called KDE Word, Gnome Spreadsheet, and Sun Presentation Software?
No, we couldn't even do that, because we'd have to name the projects themselves with a name that makes sense, so KDE would be called the "Desktop Environment Project That's Based On A Library That Used To Be Called QT Only We Can't Call It That Anymore Because It's Not Descriptive Enough." Sun would suffer even worse.
Only Gnome and GTK+ would survive, since they are descriptive acronyms based on (somewhat) descriptive acronyms. We probably wouldn't be able to get away with using them in acronymic form, though. So GTK+ would suddenly become the "Gnu Image Manipulation Program ToolKit Plus"
God save us with Gnome - we couldn't call it the GNU Network Object Model Environment, because we'd have to unroll the GNU, so it would become the GNU's Not Unix Network OBject Model Environment, only suddenly we have another acronym to unroll, and everything goes to hell and it's like trying to debug C++ programs that use multiple inheritance using gdb.
Re:Yes (Score:1)
Re:Yes (Score:2)
Do I need to say "Saturn the car, not the planet", if I'm talking about a new 4 door sedan? You can figure out the meaning based on the context.
Re:Yes (Score:1)
You do, if you're in one of the (many) countries where such cars are not sold.
Re:Yes (Score:2)
Something can only be obvious after one has direct experience with it. For example, it's obvious to me that certain vegetables should be blanched before being served in a pasta dish, or for that matter what "blanched" means - but someone who hasn't worked in a kitchen wouldn't know that, so I would have to explain it to them.
The idea is to consider the audience you're talking to and explain it at the required level. The Slashdot audience is comprised primarily of geeks, and geeks tend to click links and read what they're about.
For the record, BTW, Excel courses are optional, atleast in most Ontario high schools. It's not mandatory learning material like "calculator".
You're making the assumption that your audience already knows that there is an automotive manufacturer that goes by the name of "Saturn".Re:Yes (Score:2)
Well, I'm from the UK, and until a couple of years ago (when I went to the USA) I had never heard of Saturn cars.
So yes, you need to say it.
On the other hand, I am also fed up of seeing things announced on slashdot by name only, with no description at all of what it is. Even the goddamn press release took about 4 paras to mention what it was talking about. Somebody needs to learn how to write press releases.
From the comments it seems that there are many people like me who read the story, and found their first thought to be "What the blinking flip is it?!"
Tim
I don't get people sometimes... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I don't get people sometimes... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, though, why not? Yes, we have Blender, but we also have over a dozen window managers. Open source is about choice - if you like something stick with it. People tend to get all up in arms about KDE and Gnome, but it's easy to see that without each other, neither would have pressed to reach the level of functionality that both have attained at this point.
Re:I don't get people sometimes... (Score:2)
Re:I don't get people sometimes... (Score:2)
Because while Blender may be well endowed with features, its user interface sucks. Really, really sucks. Moonlight 3D (and I admit, I haven't used it in years) had a much better UI. To rework the blender UI would take a lot of work, almost a complete rewrite. Besides, as others have said, choice is *good*, and since they're both now GPL, they can cross polinate each other to improve both projects.
Re:I don't get people sometimes... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I don't get people sometimes... (Score:2)
What if you don't like blender? what if you don't like how it's coded (and therefore won't contribute to it)? or how it looks? or even the community or people who created it?
Bottom line: the reason moonlight exists is the same reason kde or gnome exist, or freeBSD or Linux exist, or PostgreSQL or MySQL exist. And the same reason we exist: diversity, choice, darwinism, alternatives.
Re:I don't get people sometimes... (Score:3, Insightful)
Any actual working implementation of an idea is a lot better than vapourware, and its easier to implement something with tools you already understand how to use.
It's all about choice, really.
Yum!! (Score:1)
Is this better than Blender? (Score:2, Interesting)
If not...why does it exist? Why not just get the Blender sources and add what you want into it?
Re:Is this better than Blender? (Score:5, Interesting)
why does it exist?
- because some stupid guy did not take the sources of blender in 1996 or so when he started moonlight
- because some other stupid guys liked moonlight and used it
- because it's easier to cope with without learning yet-another-GUI-paradigm
- because it's fun hacking it (blender doesn't even build yet afaik)
- because blender sources weren't free in january, when I started
- and finally, because I guess that the blender sources are much bigger and less understandable than source that was once meant to be open instead of some corporate beast that wasn't supposed to see the light
maybe some stuff like choice could be brought in to the discussion as well...
Re:Is this better than Blender? (Score:4, Insightful)
- because some stupid guy did not take the sources of blender in 1996 or so when he started moonlight
- because some other stupid guys liked moonlight and used it
- because it's easier to cope with without learning yet-another-GUI-paradigm
- because it's fun hacking it (blender doesn't even build yet afaik)
- because blender sources weren't free in january, when I started
- and finally, because I guess that the blender sources are much bigger and less understandable than source that was once meant to be open instead of some corporate beast that wasn't supposed to see the light
- and because you are one cool dude
Seriously, let me say, um, 5 things: 1) Thanks a lot for doing this 2) Congratulations on your release 3) Keep it up 4) The glass angel is gorgeous! 5) Please ignore the clueless dickheads who probably never coded anything in their lives and never contributed to any project, yet think they know who should work on which project and why.
Do we really need another 3D suit? (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:Do we really need another 3D suit? (Score:1)
Re:Do we really need another 3D suit? (Score:1)
Take a highly skilled engineer, an equally skilled architect, and a team of 60 well-trained construction specialists, and you can put together a bridge.
A million barefoot workers working 24/7 with a basketful of dirt and rocks, and you can manage a dam, perhaps.
It is better to have a small, highly skilled team that a large lumbering one for many projects.
Nothing wrong with my suit (Score:2, Funny)
Nothing wrong with my suit, my tailor made it fit perfectly, even bought the waistcoat to finish it off
ok i gotta go back to my editing suite and get some work done
Re:Do we really need another 3D suit? (Score:4, Insightful)
The users of Moonlight 3D will decide the answer to that question.
While it is noble to undertake writing a 3D suit, is it prudent to attempt to rewrite something that had already been written by 1999? To work on a project that is leagues behind the professional suits and that for all intents and purposes will most likely never be used in a professional setting?
Who's to say what will become of Moonlight 3d in the future? I'm sure people didn't think much would come of Linus' little side project either but look what happened.
Blender is a scan line renderer w/a real time engine and animation capabilities w/an efficient but arcane UI.
Moonlight 3D is a ray tracer w/a nice interface and decent nurbs, curve functionality
Hopefully these two projects will be able to learn and feed off of one another's progress (esp since they're both GPL) and both projects will be better off in the end!
An informative post!.....reels in shock (Score:2)
For those folks that are saying "what! two whole GPL'ed 3D programs for Linux! what's the need?", take a look at the list here [google.com] and then tell me there isn't room for a couple more competing GPL'ed programs.
Good luck to both the Blender and Moonlight3D guys.
Re:Do we really need another 3D suit? (Score:2)
No one asked you what was noble and what wasn't. If you know the slightest thing about programming you'd be aware that you don't start writing something beat what's already been made, you start by writing something, and then you add to it, and as your knowledge increases you can take on more and more complex or difficult tasks. At this moment, there is no open source 3D modeller/renderer/kitchen sink which these guys can go to and learn how to do these complex things. The algorithms used by these complicated applications are all but unknown to the community; the proprietary ones certainly aren't published in books, and even if they were it would take a great deal of skill to "get inside" them, figure out how they work, etc.
We have to start at the beginning.
Did you use the Gimp three years ago? I tell you it wasn't a "photoshop-alike" then. We have to start somewhere and then move up. There are programs we have in free software that are so advanced, there's no analog for them in closed-source. For example, the RADIANCE [lbl.gov] renderer is the only one that does light accurately, and it has been free for ages and will become open source in December. Aspell [aspell.net] uses a new algorithm that beats every other spell checker. At its inception, would you have said we shouldn't invest this time and effort into another spell checker?
The problem is that people like you look at open source development like closed source development. As though when a project is formed, some segment of the total number of developers have to be allocated to it. Fortunately, the way it really works is developers work on whatever they are attracted to. Even huge projects like Mozilla have at the core less than 20 developers. I haven't checked, but I would guess that these 3D projects will have 2-4 core developers. Everyone else will contribute from time to time, or possibly even just once. But the people who work on Moonlight are not people who necessarily would have worked on Blender. They are not even necessarily people who would have developed for anything at all.
What does a professional setting have to do with whether or not something should be developed? Take enlightenment for example. I bet many people said, this is a window manager which will never be used in a professional setting. And yet I know several sysadmins who have used enlightenment as their window manager! It's like science, we don't research the things we think are going to bring about "useful" discoveries, because that's counter-productive and we never know which research will result in useful discoveries. Instead, we just generate all of the software we'd like to generate, and some of it will get used, and some will not. AWK is a good counter example; it was developed for a particular purpose for which it is extremely useful (parsing text files with very uniform structure). And yet, it has fallen by the wayside because Perl can do essentially the same things, but is a more powerful programming language in general.
To summarize:
--
Daniel
newsworthy? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:newsworthy? (Score:2)
OK, I'll bite. Note that Moonlight's focus is on intuitive interface, a important niche to stake out in the OS/3D ecology, don't you think? On the face of it, a little competition on the UI front would not hurt Blender at all. Also, maybe we'll see some useful cross-package code and file standards developed as a result of users using both tools for different strengths, and wanting to port between them. With just one major modeling package, this important area might not get as much attention as it needs.
Anyway, OS/3D modelling *is* front page news because it strengthens our hand on the 3D game front, one of the few major areas where free software is still weak. But it's coming, it's coming...
Bad movie plot (Score:1)
Will we get to see two chicks do battle with sharp objects?
No? Yawn.
Sheesh (Score:4, Funny)
I read the comments... everything is either off-topic or refers to the article negatively...
I'm puzzled. What's up? Could it be that I--!! QUICK! Scroll to the top again! YES! I foolishly turned off my "michael" filter!
A quick trip to my preferences prevents this mishap in the future. Now.. must turn off third person narrative... ...
This is SWEET!!! (Score:5, Informative)
To me, the user interface was quite simply far more user friendly then Blender is. (Of course, that is a matter of opinion and that is my opinion.)
Documentation (Score:5, Insightful)
I have downloaded the source to both Blender and Moonlight. And I'm still banging my head to figure out how to compile and run the darn things. What these projects need is some good documentation and developers jumping on board working out features.
So who's with me? Here I go to join the dev maillist [studentenbude.ath.cx]
Choose your battles (Score:3, Funny)
Vi vs. Emacs, now -that's- a religious battle! All other software-of-choice religious battles pale in comparison.
[Checks off 'Step One' for his insane plan to solve the world energy crisis by generating a flamewar about flamewars.]
I'm not dead yet... (Score:3, Funny)
must.. avoid.. lameness.. filter...
romantic walks under the moonlight (Score:3, Funny)
It provides:
1) pond simulation(for breaking the ice commenting on that frog you stepped on)
2) real star maps(so you can count stars while she fells asleep)
3) nice seats for sitting romantically holding hands(not to say that you're broke, of course)
4) no dangers from people with green hair(of course you have not been in the gym lately, due to that school project)
The 3d suite's previous name was 'geekdream', but the author changed it for political reasons.
Description: (Score:2, Informative)
I need this (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:I need this (Score:2)
hmm this tool looks really (Score:1, Informative)
honestly - wings3d is far more powerfull as a modeller. the interface of ml3d is worse than blender imho
Whadya mean, "why do we need it??" (Score:2, Insightful)
I am really amazed... (Score:1, Offtopic)
That should be a front page story, right there.
Nice to see its alive again. (Score:1)
more confusion (Score:1)
checkerboards, curved mirrors (Score:5, Funny)
If I see one more checkboard or curved mirror surface on "art" generated by a raytracing program I _will_ kill someone.
Re:checkerboards, curved mirrors (Score:2, Funny)
:'( Moonlight went closed-source (Score:2, Informative)
What is really sad is that this used to be a GPLed Open Source project.
I'm a wee bit surprised RMS isn't all over them for continuing to call their project "free software"... (I believe the quote was: "Moonlight|3D is a free software modeller and renderer...")
Journalism 101 (Score:3, Informative)
Tried Compiling on RH 8 (Score:2, Interesting)
Art of Illusion (Score:4, Informative)
This program never seems to get any publicity, but it's a free, highly functional open source modelling + renderer + animation package. It's got just about all the features you could ask for:
It's written in Java so it performs nicely under Windows, Linux and the Mac. That plus Wings3D [wings3d.com] (a great open source modeller based on Nendo [izware.com] gives you a complete Open Source animation package.
Thankyou, Thankyou, Thankyou (Score:2)
I use blender and love it, but you (or someone else) had pointed out Wings3d before as a better modeler that could be used in conjunction with blender, and I had lost the link (and slashdot's search function is next to useless for digging up worthwhile information in older threads).
Thanks for reposting that info, and may I suggest Wings3D should list their project on freshmeat (it wasn't there, and I couldn't recall the project name. I'm sure it is buried on google somewhere, but after wading through several google pages having searched on 'free 3d modeller linux' I gave up). I have added links to the packages you mention on my website [expressivefreedom.org] (under the Free Tools sidebar) to help out, but getting that project listed on freshmeat would go a much longer way toward getting the word out.
Thanks for the post, you saved me a long search I'd decided to put off, and deserve every +1 mod point you got.
Yes (Score:5, Funny)
So, rather than using a digital camera, I made the smart (and obvious) choice to have an art student draw some scenes onto a 3'x6' cow carcass with a palette of 16 different paints.
In hindsight, seeing how she intuitively grasped the essential elements and pared the decision tree makes me glad that I left my Canon at home!
EricKrout.com [erickrout.com]
Wrong. (Score:1, Informative)
Re:3D modelers (Score:5, Informative)
O(n) describes how the processing time of a problem increases when more elements are put into the input set. For example, O(n) means that when you add 1 to the input set, you add 1 to the number of loops at runtime.
O(2^n) means that for each element you put into the input set, the number of loops doubles. Thus, while an input set with 3 elements in it would loop 8 times, an input set with 4 elements would loop 16, etc. The number gets unmanageable fast - 10 elements = 1024 loops, 20 elements = 1048576 loops, 100 elements = 1267650600228229401496703205376 loops. Basically, it means that for any significant amount of data, don't expect it to be finished in your lifetime.
Re:Next stop .. game development (Score:1)
Re:Next stop .. game development (Score:2)
slashdot's nice search function (Score:1)
Re:slashdot's nice search function (Score:1)