pouët.net

LEHTS POST PROCESSS PR0N WITH OPENCV EVEYRBODY!!2

Hitchhikr, FR still upgrading their demotool - it is coding (as Kb said), that's what I meant. But many people simply use released demotools as they use 3DMax or Logic.

Parapete, you better no guessing, but looking for demos I coded.

You're so clever, thank you. Now read what I posted before. Or do you really think I counting "State of the Art" as pure .avi file as well?

So, only one thing I talking about from the very first post is: increasing demo size limit will lead artists to use more preproducted art. Large painted pictures, large photo-based textures, complex stored animation and... yes, video. You should face it better.
If there wouldn't be video in demos, I'll say the Scene stop it's progress, as game industry does (still the same shit everywhere, but today's shit is large, hooray!). Today's games visuals still sucks in compare with old (even black&white) movies on crappy TV-set. Ryg said about 1280x1024 demos, but he, probably, forget about HDTV which has larger resolution (1920×1080) and it's already here. So, IMHO, as tracked music has no chance against "real" music, then demos without prerecorded video will have no chance against "real" videoproduction in future. Or may be someone use the modern games (sick!) as a reference point for the demoscene?...

SRSLY, get the fuck over that damn "tracked music" topic.

It's not that back then somebody thought "let's do the best music program i can imagine and don't care on what hardware it runs on" and then invented tracker formats. No, music playback in demos and games always used (surprise, surprise!) the technology inside the machine that's most suitable for it.

That's the whole point. Back then, we had soundcards that could play four (Amiga) or 32 (GUS/AWE) mono samples, and we neither had the CPU time nor space for a thing like MP3 (even when it already was invented back then), so we used those 32 channels. The "Tracker" format stemmed from the need of early Amiga musicians to find a music format that's editable but takes as less CPU time as possible (that's why the .MOD format is tailor-made for the Amiga sound chip, and that's why the player is so quirky - there are tons of shortcuts in there to save time, eg. the first frame of a row is handled by a completely different piece of code than the rest, etc.).

Back then, nobody in their right mind boasted with "it's realtime" because there wasn't any other freaking choice. And as said - demo coders just want the music to get played without a hassle.

Well, guess what - now we got sound cards that are best at playing one stream, we got plenty of CPU time to have music formats that consist of 32 quantized sub bands of frequency-domain data instead of time domain samples and a list of points in time when to play them. And a nice but entirely unimportant side effect is that musicians now can do basically everything they want. So why don't let them.

On the other hand this is still not possible with graphics. Manwe's cute "but my m0vie DVDZ l00k teh bett0r!" argument aside, I STILL want to see the 64meg video file that looks better than a demo, resolution/framerate/artifact wise.

I knew it, this thread will eventually reach 64MB :)

Kb, you know, that "resolution/framerate" is a wrong valuing for movies, truly. It's may be native way of thinking for a coder, but it's complitely wrong for ordinary spectator. You (and Ryg) just trying to judge other thing on your comfort field. I pointed already to "Egon and Dönci" (if you wish, I'll pack it into 64 Mb with H.264 codec for you). Average user watching demos and movies on the same screen - for example, I'm watching "Take Me Back To Your House" musicvideo by Basement Jaxx right now (fullscreen on the second monitor, 55 Mb filesize, by the way) and you know, all that dancers, bears, horse, etc. looks quite more attractive then most demos, because there is a live actors and no realtime limits. Low resolution? May be. Who care, if it looks more attractive anyway?..
So, it's just a coder's point of view: large resolution and framerate = good. I still wondering why people are happy seeing "120 fps" meter on the screen, if 25 fps is really enough when source video is smooth. It's like "megaherz myth". Techno-people like to see big numbers, the rest do not care at all.

Good thing we don't make demos for "the rest" then!

Manwe: Next step: Turn off your movie-playing monitor, go out to the streets. OMG everybody is moving in realtime, looking so much better than demos!!!!! We need to stop doing demos and all just move on the streets in realtime!!!

(But, if possible, only with PAL resolution please).

What do you plan to fit into 64 Mb - 1024x1024 textures, music in WAV format or what? Is the quality of effects really depend of it? IMHO, 64k intros released in 2000-2002 looks better then most of today's demos. This year 256 byte intros are even more interesting then demos (from coder's point of view). And what the resolution hysteria? Heaven7 still in tops with it's 320x200 res.

BiTL: I'm not for this 64MB thing but there are indeed quick ways to fill those 64MB with stuff such as HDR lightmaps for example (8MB uncompressed for a 1024x1024 texture). And trust me, you might need a 1024x1024 texture in many cases if your object is filling the view frustum.

On the other hand, demos using HDR lightmaps are not that common yet and I guess it won't be within the next few months either ;)

this thread is the biggest gathering of retards i've had the opportunity to witness in a long time. seriously.

if you want to fake, a complete backed GI solution, ... or even MPEG compressed lightmaps to fake dynamic relighting :)

if you are honest, few nice models, some SAH optimar kd-trees for realtime raytracing (yeah), few volume data sets for raymarching, few spherical harmonics/wavelets maps or volume octrees for with PRT, ... do I continue?

I'd like to welcome you to pouet reed ;)

Scamp, you're almost right: if the demo contains as much bytes as much the street contains atoms, I'll prefer the street (read: Nature).
So, back to the topic: go forward with that 64 Mb limit and good luck, I'll say no word against it. But simply be ready to face something in the end of this way. As minimum, it would be the next warm discussion about video usage in demos.

At least the dung beetle seems to appreciate this thread!

reed:

ryg,

Manwe: We are fucking SCENERS, we all know how to find out if someone is faking effects using videos. This applies to both our compo organizers and the visitors.

And if the end result of increasing the size limit sucks, we'll just change the rule again for next year, as others have pointed out already.

But that's for giving it a rest now. :)

(EOD hopefully)

*cough*

kb:

THAT DAMN TRUCK MUST HAVE LOADED A 64MEGABYTES TRAILER....COME ON MOVE IT....BLOODY HELL

You, sir, are a complete idiot.

Hm.

My original point seems to have been missed.
Here is a quick reiteration: