pouët.net

PauloFalcao: DX/OGL is the only way of getting your code run on GPU, which today attributes to 50-99% raw math power depending on your setup. You need some way of putting these to use.

KK, yes it's true. I don't have a solution to that problem.
A new virtual platform?
The render could be done in a system that uses the CPU and GPU por computing.
For now i think using DX or OpenGL it's not ideal... but it's ok.

Think more like OpenCL!

The important thing here is the code and data to be in the prod, using OS stuff for generating stuff would be unfair against prods that are self-contained and just use some data and math / code for generating images and sound.

BTW the 4k procedural image is a good example of unlimited time for rendering.
That can be extended to 4k or 8k or 16k or 32k or 64k... you get the point... procedural animation with sound.

Today 4k procedural images can use OpenGL / DirectX, is that OK? I don't know... I personally would like them to be "pure" intel asm code with no OpenGL / DirectX... But for now, using OpenGL / DirectX / OpenCL is probably the best solution.

There's no need to ban GPU code! Just make it so you can use whatever's on a standard IS install. Dx, OpenGL, but no additional stuff.

And yeah, compo rules will need consideration. If the exe dumps frames and a wav, a few frames can be enough to check the output matches a video. The deadline can be before the party like it is for gamedev. There are options :) Also, the exe should take parameters for output res. this almost guarantees somebody will run it to get best quality for their screen, and the chance if getting caught cheating is high.

I agree with psonice, rules should not be too restrictive now.

Really? So we can conclude scene finally IS dead by now!

i dont exactly see the problem with distributing the needed dll files with the intro or in a seperate pakage which is not the ms sdk (think: scene runtime installer?)...
sure its not as nice as just downloading a 4kb archive (which most of the time isnt true anyway because theres several "versions" of the intro bundled all the time anyway) but it seems like the most convenient and least problematic way for now.
does it really make a difference if the dll file is included or resides in some system directory?

Thinking about how a '4k video' compo could work. You'd need a volunteer with a fast box and plenty of disk space to do the capturing. Potential rules:

- Deadline 1 week before the party (to allow render + video encode time)
- Files must be 4k max and run on a vanilla OS install + drivers
- Exe must accept resolution parameters
- Max. 1 hour rendering time on the compo box. After 1 hour the exe is killed and whatever was rendered will be shown. This hopefully makes the capture guy's life a bit easier than "unlimited time" ;)
- "Compo parameters" can be used for anything 'heavy', with lower quality or resolution
- "Compo version" video must be submitted, to be shown in the party as a backup if something goes wrong / HDDs die / etc.
- "HQ version" video can also be submitted for release, with HQ parameters / super high res etc. This gets rendered on your own box, as slowly as you want :)

Can you make a separate thread for that? I somewhat like the idea - but it does srsly not belond here.

So back to it - exclusion or inclusion? I'm in for exclusion (as you might have noticed) - at least at a certain point of time in the near future.

About the realtime 4k, i agree with wysiwt. Just bundle the necessary files on a separate package. I would not mind downloading several megabytes for a 4k ... It's odd but it's ok :) Bandwidth it's not the problem now.

the issue is not the bandwith - it's more or less the question if a 4k is still a 4k if you need to install a couple of hundred megabytes of extra stuff that's not available with a standard windows with graphics drivers and the normal directx installed.

A standard "scene runtime" doesn't sound that bad, you could have all the necessary dlls in a package and update it once a year or so; makes it easy for compo orgas and ppl watching the prods.

Not to be a pessimist, but adding further restrictions to the 4k intro category will surely kill it off entirely sooner rather than later. I'm willing to overlook having to update a DLL or two in order to have people still make 4k intros.

if you do a scene runtime anyway the next step is have 4ks as something else than PE files, and then run from the 4k package launcher. No problems with antivirus or crappy optimus drivers peeking around in the weird structures. And more space when without the header/decruncher.
But a tad too artificial for my taste.

las: The question is no brainer. Anything thats 4k and works on any setup fairly popular at any point in human history is a valid 4k. And which setups are accepted on any given party is up to party orgs.

Invalid.

Fixed hardware platforms have flourished like weeds, sothe idea to clamp down on 4k specifications should be hailed like the robot laser lizard monster made of awesomium that it is.

Sure, it'll put off a few people who are constantly unconcerned about how it'll run elsewhere, but fuck them. They are usually smart enough to add a disclaimer how this is their hobby, no problem in bouncing that ball back.

As a 4K coder, I'll throw in my 2 cents... I'd prefer to keep the DirectX dlls installed on the compo machines for at least a few more years. What's the point in pulling the rug from under peoples feet just because MS changes some licensing terms? You're forcing all the DX/HLSL coders to switch to OpenGL/GLSL for no good reason. If it gets less popular, orgos can decide for themselves to stop supporting it, but I feel Las is trying to force the issue. So KK has leading.

(For the record, I use OpenGL, so it won't affect me directly, but I've made 4Ks when DOS was "dead" but accelerated 3D on Windows wasn't popular yet, and it sucks to "win" a compo because you're the only entrant. So ending support for a perfectly workable platform just because = bad).

I really don't see the need to remove the realtime limitation. In my opinion it's the most important difference between the demoscene(and games) and other computer artforms. Balancing speed vs visuals has always been part of the scene, optimizing your code is important. Hardware is still getting faster, so we already get more headroom for new things to try every year. I really wouldn't like to compete against such "4k animations". Put them in a different category, as we do with the 4K graphics already. (And not every party has to have all 4K compo variants, of course)

Well we are already doing that for at least 2 years now. D3DX was never standard part of Vista nor Windows 7. It's enough. Really.

This is most certainly not going to kill the 4k scene at all and people who know how to get their shit done wont have any problems in using a different API.


4k coding is no pony farm. Oh and btw. compatibility to current default systems is a pretty damn good reason.


...

Btw. the "top" 4k according to pouet this year is using OpenGL and in the ~top20 it's roughly 50:50 DX vs. GL. Somebody who is reallly into 4k coding wont be stopped by beeing forced to a certain API because the other one he liked to use became unusable on end user systems.

you cant just dismiss a valid point with "..." and then strawman the subject.

And while I'm in a bad mood: I haven't seen that much evolution in 4k in the last few years.

And: Shifter has leading.

Las: According to https://www.opengl.org/wiki/Getting_Started: "Without [video card] drivers, you will default to a software version of OpenGL 1.1 (on Win98, ME, and 2000), a Direct3D wrapper that supports OpenGL 1.1 (WinXP), or a Direct3D wrapper that supports OpenGL 1.1 (Windows Vista and Windows 7)[probably typo, 1.4 according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista]."

So if you really take a default windows install as the holy standard, we're all back to pre-shader times :)

I didn't claim it would kill the 4K scene, but if you'd force me to retool to DX/HLSL, I'd probably lose months of productivity. My free time got very sparse since I have a kid, and I'd rather try new things than relearn the finer points of a different API. So I'd avoid 4Ks and stay with demos for a while, yes.

Well - graphics drivers are a thing almost everyone installs (despite the guys who like "the big fonts" and stuff) and a major plus: At least on my Win7 - windows update downloads those drivers and asks me to install them (!!!) - it does this neither with D3DX nor the visual studio runtimes (which we as well could allow - just for the lulz of it).

In order to use DX9-11 properly - you need graphics drivers anyways. And DX9-DX11 DLLs are also present and ready to be used - there's just no shadercompiler - you have to store binary.

So please - keep the graphics driver out of this discussion - as you already stated - removing that from a standard config would be not very wise.

I for my part would like to see more 4k intros that run on more computers than just those with a "demoscene toolkit" installed.

Anyways - "the orgas" will decide what they allow and 4k makers will choose where and whether they participate.

The least I would like to see from "the orgas side" is that they point out in well readable font with high contrast on the bigscreen (red & bold if the other stuff is "standard colored") that the intro which is next up needs you to install something you might not have and is not part of a current standard setup ("Uses deprecated D3DX" would be enough to make me more than happy).