carlos@io.UUCP (Carlos Smith) (07/25/87)
With great eagerness and anticipation I went to my local Amiga dealer to check out and hopefully purchase Videoscape 3D. I am very into 3D and have been looking forward to the appearance of 3D editors and animators for some time. In other words, my plastic was melting in my wallet. I am gravely disappointed. First, I should temper this report by stating that all of our attempts to use it were on one machine (A1000), with 2Meg expansion memory (Starboard). It is POSSIBLE there is something wrong with the machine, even though it is one of the machines this store does and has been using to demo all their software. This store is also an Amiga and 64 store ONLY, and they know the machine. Anyway, I wanted to run it through its paces before buying it. I examined the manual, and then tried to load an object, its motion path, and the camera motion, and then preview the animation. After 3 crashes when the camera motion requester came up, we decided that the disk we were using must be bad (it was stamped "Demo"). So we opened a fresh box and tried that. We loaded a simple object and its motion path (paperairplane and flypaperairplane) that appeared on the objects disk provided, and what appeared to be the corresponding camera motions (viewpaperairplane). Then, begin animation, which, according to the manual should preview the animation a frame at a time. Nothing appeared on the screen, though it beeped, apparently to indicate the frame was finished. OK, with a 3D system it is easy to get a view angle wrong and have the object behind you or something. No problem with that possibility. Even though these appeared to be setup as examples for animation. What is unforgivable is that it GURUed every time we either aborted the animation (using "abort animation") or let it finish (using "next frame" to the end). Nothing ever appeared on the screen after we began animation except red alerts. I spent about 2 hours in the store, with 2 of the store people trying to get it to work. I read much of the manual trying to find out what we did wrong. I WANTED it to work. But I and the store people gave up in disgust. It is easy to get things wrong or misunderstand, but you should get error reports or blank screens, not GURU's. By the way, it shouldn't be the fast ram, the package and manual state that you NEED an extra meg to store animations, and 2 more to do higher res. Needless to say, I didn't shell out the $200. I am happy as H**l that I tried it first. My own conclusion is that this package, like too many Amiga programs, was never QA'ed by the publisher before shipping. Again, conceding the possibility that we did something wrong, it shouldn't just CRASH all the time. Quality software doesn't do that. It will tell you that you F**ked up. We did what any user would do upon coming home with the package. We then rebooted, pored over the manual and tried again. And again... It appears to me that Aegis never had anyone without previous exposure to the program try it fresh out of the box with the provided documentation only. So, I recommend that anyone interested in this package TRY before you BUY. If you get it to work, more power to you and PLEASE post something here, saying you got it to work and if you have any idea what we did wrong mention it. I do not want to blast the product or company without more evidence. I am only trying to protect potential buyers. For a quick description of the program - it is NOT very visual, as far as we got, and reading about the modeling capabilities. Camera motion is specified ONLY via an ASCII file. All objects and motion paths are stored as ASCII files (which are well defined - this is good for those who wish to write their own utilities), and some utilities to help define objects through question and answer (number of sides? height? Y height? Radius?). Also provided is a version of Rot that originally appeared on Fish disk 71. This seems to be the only visual graphic interface provided. It is a VERY simple 3D editor, and it is excellent for free on a Fish disk, but is not what you would expect as the only graphic editor in a $200 3D animation program. I apologize for the length of this posting, but I wanted to warn people to carefully check out this well-hyped, long-awaited, expensive and as it appears to me, flawed program. Any opinions contrary to or confirming my experiences are gladly welcomed. -- Carlos Smith uucp:...!harvard!umb!ileaf!carlos Bix: carlosmith
ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) (07/26/87)
In article <344@io.UUCP> carlos (Carlos Smith) writes about VideoScape 3D: For someone who wasn't terribly impressed with the product, I've been using it an AWFUL lot over the past 48 hours. I can only assume my review hasn't made it back east yet. I think I can respond to Carlos's difficulties. >Anyway, I wanted to run it through its paces before buying it. I examined the >manual, and then tried to load an object, its motion path, and the camera >motion, and then preview the animation. After 3 crashes when the camera motion >requester came up, we decided that the disk we were using must be bad (it was >stamped "Demo"). So we opened a fresh box and tried that. We loaded a simple >object and its motion path (paperairplane and flypaperairplane) that appeared >on the objects disk provided, and what appeared to be the corresponding camera >motions (viewpaperairplane). Then, begin animation, which, according to the >manual should preview the animation a frame at a time. [ ... ] This is an interesting little crock. In order to see those animations correctly, you have to load the "settings" file. Click on Load Settings at the bottom of the screen, and pick the paper airplane. Then run the animation. You should see a wireframe plane fly around for a few seconds (and when it's through, the whole schmeer gets FLUSHED!). Settings files contain all the information describing a full animated scene. >Needless to say, I didn't shell out the $200. [ ... ] $200? Yow! I thought it was $99.95. Good thing my boss loaned my his copy (no, I haven't copied it). >My own conclusion is that this package, like too many Amiga >programs, was never QA'ed by the publisher before shipping. Again, conceding >the possibility that we did something wrong, it shouldn't just CRASH all the >time. Quality software doesn't do that. [ ... ] Odd. I've had minimal crashes. >And again... It appears >to me that Aegis never had anyone without previous exposure to the program >try it fresh out of the box with the provided documentation only. > I did. I had very little trouble, though I was flabberghasted at how many shorcomings there were (see my review of a few days ago). Remember that, up until recently, only Allen Hastings ever used the program to any real extent. >So, I recommend that anyone interested in this package TRY before you BUY. > I concur. It's a very odd program, and is, in my estimation, For Hackers Only With Powerful Text Editors And Experience In 3D Graphics and Visualization. >Also provided is a >version of Rot that originally appeared on Fish disk 71. This seems to be the >only visual graphic interface provided. It is a VERY simple 3D editor, and it >is excellent for free on a Fish disk, but is not what you would expect as the >only graphic editor in a $200 3D animation program. > I agree. I tried using it once to define a screwy object. It won't take fractional coordinates, and appears to have a limit of 6 points per polygon. I don't touch it anymore; I write quick C programs to crank out unusual objects and connectivity lists. >First, I should temper this report by stating that >all of our attempts to use it were on one machine (A1000), with 2Meg expansion >memory (Starboard). It is POSSIBLE there is something wrong with the machine, > Based on your description, I would say that the hardware was flakey. I've had minimal crashes with both systems I've used it on (A1000's with 2Meg ASDG racks (stop snickering, Perry :-) )). -------- For those of you who are going to brave the storm and get VS3D, may I relate some of my experiences over the past two days? Good... EGG is the provided tool I use the most (at least for the object I've been trying to model). You must remember to specify the Y coordinate sequence from topmost to bottommost. Otherwise your object will appear inside-out. EGG-provided cylinders are very inefficient; it's better to ask for a surface of revolution, and cap the ends by hand with 'vi' (or EMACS, or ED, or EDLIN, or DiskEd, or whatever you like to use). OCT has also seen a lot of use from me. Something you should watch out for: If you apply a rotation to an object, all rotations seem to happen "at once", not in a sequence. That is, if you ask for both heading and pitch rotation, the pitch rotation will not happen after the heading rotation; it will happen "before" it. It's kinda goofy. Also, be careful of negative scaling. Oct doesn't check polygon consistency after the scale, so if you scale negatively, your final object may look inside-out. ROT got used for a total of about five minutes. The guy who wrote this should have his goldfish confiscated. The coordinate display string gadgets show a fractional coordinate (i.e. "0.0", "4.0", etc.). However, if you try to enter a fractional coordinate, ROT throws away the fractional part. I tried entering 0.5. ROT called it 0.0. "Fine, I'll edit the output file," I thought. I then tried defining a polygon with eight sides. ROT only took six, then silently ignored further attempts to add more sides. I gave up after that. You *NEED* two megs. At least. The way I've been working, I "run" VideoScape, and load EGG and OCT when I need them. I run out of Perry's Sooper Dooper VD0:, and keep progressive object files in it, updating to floppy when they're done. VS3D works nicely out of VD0:. I also keep my C compiler environment around (I boot with my Aztec development disk). This way, I can write quick C programs to generate coordinate and connectivity lists, which can then be tried out very quickly by using VS3D as a previewer. Interesting side note: Steven Levy (I think) has been showing off a new solid modeller from Byte-By-Byte called Sculpt-3D. I've watched it working up close. This is *orders of magnitude* better than ROT. And the Sculpt-3D file format will be documented, so you'll be able to write a program to move objects back and forth. Imagine: Sculpt-3D for modelling, VideoScape for animation (at least for the near term). This is what multi-tasking is for! As I said in my last message, be prepared to put in a LOT of work if you're going to do anything with VideoScape. I have. I hope I'm finished by SIGGRAPH.... _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape ihnp4!ptsfa -\ \_ -_ Bike shrunk by popular demand, dual ---> !{well,unicom}!ewhac O----^o But it's still the only way to fly. hplabs / (pronounced "AE-wack") "Work FOR? I don't work FOR anybody! I'm just having fun." -- The Doctor
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (07/29/87)
In article <3627@well.UUCP> ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) writes: >In article <344@io.UUCP> carlos (Carlos Smith) writes about VideoScape 3D: > > For someone who wasn't terribly impressed with the product, I've >been using it an AWFUL lot over the past 48 hours. I can only assume my >review hasn't made it back east yet. I think I can respond to Carlos's >difficulties. > [Bunch of stuff deleted] > > > As I said in my last message, be prepared to put in a LOT of work if >you're going to do anything with VideoScape. I have. I hope I'm finished >by SIGGRAPH.... > >_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ >Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape ihnp4!ptsfa -\ He finished in time. Move over, juggler... -- Richard Sexton INTERNET: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM UUCP: {akgua, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard "It's too dark to put the key in my ignition..."
ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) (08/01/87)
In article <1080@gryphon.CTS.COM> richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: >> As I said in my last message, be prepared to put in a LOT of work if >>you're going to do anything with VideoScape. I have. I hope I'm finished >>by SIGGRAPH.... >> >>Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape ihnp4!ptsfa -\ > >He finished in time. Move over, juggler... > Ahem. Yes, I did do something. I stepped on Pixar's toes (I've already fired off an apology). Bill Volk got a hold of what I did at SIGGRAPH, and said that he'll upload it to everything in sight (which I, personally, have no problem with). However, I would ask all those that redistribute my latest work to please include some form of the following disclaimer in a README file or some other prominent place. "The accompanying animation was created by Leo L. Schwab, and was done so without Pixar's knowledge, assistance, or consent." This is at the request of Craig Good of Pixar, who saw what I did at SIGGRAPH, and was a bit perturbed. _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape ihnp4!ptsfa -\ \_ -_ Bike shrunk by popular demand, dual ---> !{well,unicom}!ewhac O----^o But it's still the only way to fly. hplabs / (pronounced "AE-wack") "Work FOR? I don't work FOR anybody! I'm just having fun." -- The Doctor
good@pixar.UUCP (08/06/87)
In article <3656@well.UUCP> ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) writes:
:
: Yes, I did do something. I stepped on Pixar's toes (I've already
:fired off an apology). Bill Volk got a hold of what I did at SIGGRAPH, and
:said that he'll upload it to everything in sight (which I, personally, have
:no problem with).
:
: However, I would ask all those that redistribute my latest work to
:please include some form of the following disclaimer in a README file or
:some other prominent place.
:
: "The accompanying animation was created by Leo L. Schwab, and was
:done so without Pixar's knowledge, assistance, or consent."
:
: This is at the request of Craig Good of Pixar, who saw what I did at
:SIGGRAPH, and was a bit perturbed.
Everybody should note that I had no idea this would actually be distributed.
Showing it at SIGGRAPH displayed some carelessness on the part of the Amiga
booth, but distribution would clearly be a copyright violation.
Also note that the disclaimer, while well-intentioned, is meaningless. The
only meaningful phrase is "Copyright 1987 Pixar", which we obviously can't
allow since Leo's animation is not licensed nor endorsed by us. This isn't
to pick on anybody, but we cannot be selective about enforcing a copyright
or we lose it. A lot of people, yours truly included, put in a long summer
of 80 to 90-hour weeks to make "Red's Dream", so you'll forgive us if we're
protective of our baby. Thanks for your cooperation.
--
--Craig
...{ucbvax,sun}!pixar!goodschein@cbmvax.UUCP (Dan Schein MAGAZINES) (08/06/87)
In article <978@pixar.UUCP> good@pixar.UUCP (Come back here, you coward! I'll bite your legs off!) writes: >In article <3656@well.UUCP> ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) writes: >: >: Yes, I did do something. I stepped on Pixar's toes (I've already >:fired off an apology). Bill Volk got a hold of what I did at SIGGRAPH, and >:said that he'll upload it to everything in sight (which I, personally, have >:no problem with). >: >: However, I would ask all those that redistribute my latest work to >:please include some form of the following disclaimer in a README file or >:some other prominent place. >: >: "The accompanying animation was created by Leo L. Schwab, and was >:done so without Pixar's knowledge, assistance, or consent." >: >: This is at the request of Craig Good of Pixar, who saw what I did at >:SIGGRAPH, and was a bit perturbed. > >Everybody should note that I had no idea this would actually be distributed. >Showing it at SIGGRAPH displayed some carelessness on the part of the Amiga >booth, but distribution would clearly be a copyright violation. Just to clear one point here: AEGIS was showing Leo's demo. It was not Commodore (or Commodore AMIGA if that makes you happy). Commodore only supplied the booth and most hardware. Basically Commodore is not there to play policeman, we count on the people and companies that show products in our booth to be responsible for what *THEY* show. > >Also note that the disclaimer, while well-intentioned, is meaningless. The >only meaningful phrase is "Copyright 1987 Pixar", which we obviously can't >allow since Leo's animation is not licensed nor endorsed by us. This isn't >to pick on anybody, but we cannot be selective about enforcing a copyright >or we lose it. A lot of people, yours truly included, put in a long summer >of 80 to 90-hour weeks to make "Red's Dream", so you'll forgive us if we're >protective of our baby. Thanks for your cooperation. > > >-- > --Craig > ...{ucbvax,sun}!pixar!good -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | | | Commodore Business Machines | | 1200 Wilson Drive uucp: {ihnp4|seismo|caip}!cbmvax!schein | | West Chester, PA 19380 arpa: cbmvax!schein@seismo.css.GOV | | (215) 431-9384 or schein@cbmvax.UUCP@{seismo|harvard} | | | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Quote: Those who worked the hardest Gary Ward - Oklahoma State | | are the last to surrender baseball coach | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+