Dogma demomaking
category: general [glöplog]
I recently found that demomaking for old computers has become too easy, for my taste.
People are beginning to offload too much of the process on more powerful computers, tools from other platforms, and methods that were invented more recently, with computational power in the magnitude of ten-thousands times more.
For that reason and inspired by the Dogme 95 film movement, I drafted some tenets in demomaking. These tenets have the Amiga 500 in mind, but they might be an inspiration for other platforms and scenes as well.
These definitions are not primarily meant to be proven to someone else, but for being used as a "challenge meter" for oneself and as talking points, like e.g. "with xyz I mastered level 2, now I'm trying a level 3 production".
A proof however for a compo could be fun, too, winners could be required to demonstate snapshots from their development cycle live on stage, with the audience shouting "show us how you generated that table!" :-) A bit like workstages in gfx.
With the Amiga being a relatively advanced computer for its time, levels 1 and 2 are rather easy to achieve on this platform, but level 3 would be quite some challenge, for me at least.
Feedback welcome!
DOGMA DEMOMAKING
------------------------------------------------
drafted by Bifat, 29-05-2024
DOGMA LEVEL 1
- No emulator use allowed
- Code/test/debug only against real machine
- Other tools on other computers are allowed
Examples: editor, compiler, assembler, cruncher, paint and music programs
DOGMA LEVEL 2
- No other computers allowed
- Only tools running on real machine allowed
Examples: editor, compiler, assembler, cruncher, paint and music programs
- Additional hardware (CPU, memory, ...) on target machine allowed
DOGMA LEVEL 3
- Only hardware and tools allowed that existed at the time
Example: Trash'm-One, DPaint3, Noisetracker for OCS Amiga 500
(when DPaint4 came out, Kick2.x and ECS already existed)
You can create additional hardware and tools yourself, but only on and for the target machine and with the means, parts, and code that were available at the time or that you create.
People are beginning to offload too much of the process on more powerful computers, tools from other platforms, and methods that were invented more recently, with computational power in the magnitude of ten-thousands times more.
For that reason and inspired by the Dogme 95 film movement, I drafted some tenets in demomaking. These tenets have the Amiga 500 in mind, but they might be an inspiration for other platforms and scenes as well.
These definitions are not primarily meant to be proven to someone else, but for being used as a "challenge meter" for oneself and as talking points, like e.g. "with xyz I mastered level 2, now I'm trying a level 3 production".
A proof however for a compo could be fun, too, winners could be required to demonstate snapshots from their development cycle live on stage, with the audience shouting "show us how you generated that table!" :-) A bit like workstages in gfx.
With the Amiga being a relatively advanced computer for its time, levels 1 and 2 are rather easy to achieve on this platform, but level 3 would be quite some challenge, for me at least.
Feedback welcome!
DOGMA DEMOMAKING
------------------------------------------------
drafted by Bifat, 29-05-2024
DOGMA LEVEL 1
- No emulator use allowed
- Code/test/debug only against real machine
- Other tools on other computers are allowed
Examples: editor, compiler, assembler, cruncher, paint and music programs
DOGMA LEVEL 2
- No other computers allowed
- Only tools running on real machine allowed
Examples: editor, compiler, assembler, cruncher, paint and music programs
- Additional hardware (CPU, memory, ...) on target machine allowed
DOGMA LEVEL 3
- Only hardware and tools allowed that existed at the time
Example: Trash'm-One, DPaint3, Noisetracker for OCS Amiga 500
(when DPaint4 came out, Kick2.x and ECS already existed)
You can create additional hardware and tools yourself, but only on and for the target machine and with the means, parts, and code that were available at the time or that you create.
Does that mean that I'm a DOGMA LEVEL 3 x86 coder? ;-)
sounds badass, I like it!
How the fuck am I supposed to code for the Sega Master System on the Sega Master System? Also, cross compiling is nothing new, games for 8 bits home computers where often coded on a bit more powerful/useful hardware than the target machine.
Neon, with cross-compiling and running via cable you are already on level 1.
NR4, definitely! I'm not so sure about using Apple M2 Pro. A big array of NVidia GPUs would certainly throw you back to level 1 :-)
NR4, definitely! I'm not so sure about using Apple M2 Pro. A big array of NVidia GPUs would certainly throw you back to level 1 :-)
Quote:
I recently found that demomaking for old computers has become too easy, for my taste.
Creating really good demos is still very difficult. It doesn't matter what tools are used.
If you want me to use only old hardware and old tools to create a demo, take me back to 16 years old :)
i would probably agree if you'd replace "DOGMA" with "FUNDAMENTALISTIC WANKER"
For Cöncept, I tried to test on a real machine as much as possible, but I couldn't think of a way to remotely copy AND launch something on a DOS PC that doesn't have network (trying to set up a network card on DOS ended up a futile exercise), and aside from the physical hassle of "copy file, carry over SD, boot, run", there's something flaky with either my old PII motherboard or the IDE converter cards I used because they would eventually only boot up once in every blue moon... :( So yeah, all the respect for people who have a hardware toolchain for that stuff (and Dogma sounds fun), but I had a demo to make and it wasn't otherwise plausible.
(I did not, however, use an emulator - I simply set up the whole toolchain in a way that I was able to compile a Windows AND DOS version of the stuff.)
(I did not, however, use an emulator - I simply set up the whole toolchain in a way that I was able to compile a Windows AND DOS version of the stuff.)
So it's more like an additional "pain level" that just makes everything more tedious and ultimately less realistic that you will actually get something released?
I like that! ;)
And in a way that's not so far from the usual size constraints we already have.
But I guess that will be difficult to verify, though. Except in a live coding situation maybe.
I like that! ;)
And in a way that's not so far from the usual size constraints we already have.
But I guess that will be difficult to verify, though. Except in a live coding situation maybe.
DOGMA LEVEL 4
Build your own Amiga only using cereal boxes than do a demo on it.
Build your own Amiga only using cereal boxes than do a demo on it.
Pain, that's nonsense. It's about fun!
Don't make it sound like it would be difficult. Harddisks did exist for Amiga 500 and Kick 1.3, as well as a plethora of advanced tools.
Also it might give more recognition to people of which I know they use a paint program and the much maligned AMOS on the real machine.
Very much of current demomaking takes place entirely in a PC's comfort zone.
What kills it for me is today's overemphasis on coding against emulators, bus and memory analysis and cross development tools, and crunchers which could not reasonably crunch a production on the target machine. Add to that Photoshop, studio-level audio tools, and brute force GPU optimizers. Meh. If you just think a little bit, you can do almost as well as a GPU with a clever algiorithm on a CPU from the eighties.
What I have in mind is that you could brag in your production about a recognized dogma level, which would roughly translate to: Come over to my place, and I show you how I did this. :-)
Don't make it sound like it would be difficult. Harddisks did exist for Amiga 500 and Kick 1.3, as well as a plethora of advanced tools.
Also it might give more recognition to people of which I know they use a paint program and the much maligned AMOS on the real machine.
Very much of current demomaking takes place entirely in a PC's comfort zone.
What kills it for me is today's overemphasis on coding against emulators, bus and memory analysis and cross development tools, and crunchers which could not reasonably crunch a production on the target machine. Add to that Photoshop, studio-level audio tools, and brute force GPU optimizers. Meh. If you just think a little bit, you can do almost as well as a GPU with a clever algiorithm on a CPU from the eighties.
What I have in mind is that you could brag in your production about a recognized dogma level, which would roughly translate to: Come over to my place, and I show you how I did this. :-)
Just test everything on the "real" machine as the last step just to be sure you did an Amiga demo and forget about dogmatic concepts like "real machine".
Only code is real.
"Codigo ergo sum", Demoscenes said.
Only code is real.
"Codigo ergo sum", Demoscenes said.
Hmm, considering the rules, Branching Off would [almost] qualify for LEVEL 2.
- Coded on a high end A1200/060 + gfx board 'n shieet
- tested on A500 + 512k literally 3 steps to the right of the big one
- custom conversion and development tools by Doc.K for said high end Amiga systems like IFF2CopperColour ASM word-tables and his indispensable spline editor
- custom ARexx script by Dirtie to automatise texture slicing for the coppertwister
- PPaint & PicCon
- P61 player & convert
- Octamed Soundstudio
- Blueberry's Shrinkler
- ASMPro
The only caveats would be that the twister texture itself was produced in Blender but then again coloured in ArtEffect4 on real HW and the copper gradients created with gradient blaster.
Yes, we weren't joking when calling our 2019 anniversary demo "20 Years of ZEALOTRY" :D
- Coded on a high end A1200/060 + gfx board 'n shieet
- tested on A500 + 512k literally 3 steps to the right of the big one
- custom conversion and development tools by Doc.K for said high end Amiga systems like IFF2CopperColour ASM word-tables and his indispensable spline editor
- custom ARexx script by Dirtie to automatise texture slicing for the coppertwister
- PPaint & PicCon
- P61 player & convert
- Octamed Soundstudio
- Blueberry's Shrinkler
- ASMPro
The only caveats would be that the twister texture itself was produced in Blender but then again coloured in ArtEffect4 on real HW and the copper gradients created with gradient blaster.
Yes, we weren't joking when calling our 2019 anniversary demo "20 Years of ZEALOTRY" :D
I think démo mêlées should generate their own electricity !
Dogmas / constraints are cool!
Personally I would find it more interesting with some conceptual constraints / dogmas instead of roleplaying that we are back in 1992. But: you do you, whatever does it for you man :)
Personally I would find it more interesting with some conceptual constraints / dogmas instead of roleplaying that we are back in 1992. But: you do you, whatever does it for you man :)
i think the main difference between the original Dogme manifesto and yours is that the rules aim more on the aesthetics of the creative output and not so much on the workflow. hence a dogme movie has a very special atmosphere and everyone who is into this kind of thing recognizes where it comes from while your ideas are about how to create a production and not what its supposed to look like.
additionally while on one hand its very hard to proof you really didnt use any other computers or tools for cross development and the like the demo that comes out of it may be very much the same for the audience and as thus doesnt create anything that would resemble this manifest per se (maybe except for obvious ai/conversion/audio-sampling usage).
what you aim to achieve is to turn back the workflow to the way it was 30 years ago.
while that may be fun for you and "level the playing field" a bit its not really helping to improve productions or achieve a certain aesthetic at all. i guess it would spawn more oldschool-like intros and one-trick-ponys because big demos become such a time-intensive and tedious project most would step away from it.
part of the flavour of the scene (to me at least) has always been about technical progress, innovation and iteration. trying to freeze time or even turn it back doesnt really make for better or more creative demos and most likely also wont bring back the fun you had as a teenager (because times they are a changing).
if anything i would focus on not using additional expansions and target stock hardware (which is btw. happening more and more - esp on amiga OCS) but funnily enough even your "level 3" doesnt forbid accelerators and ram expansions given they were already available at that time.
if you have fun producing demos the hardest way possible you are of course free to do so but dont expect a lot of others to feel the same about it.
additionally while on one hand its very hard to proof you really didnt use any other computers or tools for cross development and the like the demo that comes out of it may be very much the same for the audience and as thus doesnt create anything that would resemble this manifest per se (maybe except for obvious ai/conversion/audio-sampling usage).
what you aim to achieve is to turn back the workflow to the way it was 30 years ago.
while that may be fun for you and "level the playing field" a bit its not really helping to improve productions or achieve a certain aesthetic at all. i guess it would spawn more oldschool-like intros and one-trick-ponys because big demos become such a time-intensive and tedious project most would step away from it.
part of the flavour of the scene (to me at least) has always been about technical progress, innovation and iteration. trying to freeze time or even turn it back doesnt really make for better or more creative demos and most likely also wont bring back the fun you had as a teenager (because times they are a changing).
if anything i would focus on not using additional expansions and target stock hardware (which is btw. happening more and more - esp on amiga OCS) but funnily enough even your "level 3" doesnt forbid accelerators and ram expansions given they were already available at that time.
if you have fun producing demos the hardest way possible you are of course free to do so but dont expect a lot of others to feel the same about it.
Farfar: This sounds interesting, please let's hear some examples!
I guess this is drafted probably too much from the coding perspective.
Wysiwtf: This goes more to the tool side than the creative process. Imagine what kind of ideas you come up with if computers had remained on a given level. It's not just conservation. We have a lot more knowledge accumulated today, and this is what I find exciting: Given you are getting beamed into 1988, what kind of demos can you do with this knowledge?
It's not so much about proof and enforcement of rules. Part of the idea is that you would interpret and bend the rules a bit to fill them with life, and show off your solutions.
I also want to make aware that there are people who do walk the extra miles of maintaining machines and stay trained (and even develop new methods) for old restrictions.
I'm personally far from doing level 3 productions. I just entertained the thought. :-)
But I gave some external floppy to a guy who said he'd like trying to do a demo on level 3, and even create and solder all extra hardware that would be exceeding a plain A500.
I guess this is drafted probably too much from the coding perspective.
Wysiwtf: This goes more to the tool side than the creative process. Imagine what kind of ideas you come up with if computers had remained on a given level. It's not just conservation. We have a lot more knowledge accumulated today, and this is what I find exciting: Given you are getting beamed into 1988, what kind of demos can you do with this knowledge?
It's not so much about proof and enforcement of rules. Part of the idea is that you would interpret and bend the rules a bit to fill them with life, and show off your solutions.
I also want to make aware that there are people who do walk the extra miles of maintaining machines and stay trained (and even develop new methods) for old restrictions.
I'm personally far from doing level 3 productions. I just entertained the thought. :-)
But I gave some external floppy to a guy who said he'd like trying to do a demo on level 3, and even create and solder all extra hardware that would be exceeding a plain A500.
I always thought that the idea of developing a C64 or Amiga demo on powerful PC hardware, and then downscaling it all to fit within the graphical and audio and processing constraints of each system, was a CHEAT. Sure, they look nice and professional, but look at Amiga and C64 demos from the 1980s and early 1990s, and there is a definite difference in quality, like Amiga demos from 1990-92 look more hand-pixelled and the audio samples have a rougher but more human feeling to them, and even early AGA demos from 1993-94 were listing all of the PC hardware they used to bring those results to life, so the trend started early. HOWEVER, I'm NOT saying everyone does this these days, but those that do, I think, take shortcuts to creativity. Sure, the results look polished and show off the graphics and audio of the systems to their absolute best, but it's a lot simpler to, say, take a 24-bit high-res image and scale it down to HAM8 or 256 colours, even if the results don't always look good. I'm reminded of Fairytale by Axis or the Smok picture in 5977 by Scoopex, obviously 24-bit in origin but downgraded to 256 colours, not even HAM8! What was the point of that?
I kinda like this as a creative philosophy, though for judging productions it's inappropriate since acquiring the requisite hardware can be quite the financial hurdle.
bifat: examples could be
- create a demo using only particles, no other effects allowed
- use only 3 colours (or use a fixed palette like in the Evoke pixel graphics compo)
- some kind of theme: "heist movie", "oceans are alive", "warp speed disaster"
- "make a demo using only these resources"
.. idk, I'm just jamming here :)
- create a demo using only particles, no other effects allowed
- use only 3 colours (or use a fixed palette like in the Evoke pixel graphics compo)
- some kind of theme: "heist movie", "oceans are alive", "warp speed disaster"
- "make a demo using only these resources"
.. idk, I'm just jamming here :)
As someone who likes to code with my feet up, in a couch or bean bag chair, (or *needs* to code on a bus / train / pub in order to finish something before the end of the compo) I'm forever doomed to break the DOGMA rules, even though I mostly stay inside a buggy old Asm-One version. :-(
That said, I'm with Farfar in that I find conceptual constraints more interesting. Limited development time ("do it in a single week or delete the whole thing"), sticking to a single effect and getting the most out of that, only using hand-painted textures (greeting to early 00's Ephidrena!), not allowing ANY text that's not also a sexual innuendo, etc etc.. It can all make for a fun process and interesting results.
Foebane72: Go make a demo about it.
That said, I'm with Farfar in that I find conceptual constraints more interesting. Limited development time ("do it in a single week or delete the whole thing"), sticking to a single effect and getting the most out of that, only using hand-painted textures (greeting to early 00's Ephidrena!), not allowing ANY text that's not also a sexual innuendo, etc etc.. It can all make for a fun process and interesting results.
Quote:
[...] CHEAT. [...] What was the point of that?
Foebane72: Go make a demo about it.
Quote:
create a demo using only particles, no other effects allowed
Yo!
Spawn one pixel-sized static particle at each pixel and set their colours each frame by sampling a framebuffer generated by UE5 at the corresponding frame coordinates. Easy!
bending rules is not breaking rules! :D
DOGMA LEVEL 5
let AI do it for you
let AI do it for you
