Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Interested in a FREE copy of HTML5 game maker Construct 2?

We'll be giving away three Personal Edition licences in next Tuesday's GDNet Direct email newsletter!

Sign up from the right-hand sidebar on our homepage and read Tuesday's newsletter for details!


Sky-rendering techniques


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
138 replies to this topic

#121 joeG   Members   -  Reputation: 172

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 04 June 2003 - 01:43 AM

Shoot. Well, there goes my Masters thesis topic (seriously)...On second thought, after watching the video, there''s room for improvement. For example, since all these clouds are generated by artists, maybe I could work at attaching the latest and greatest micro/meso-scale model to the rendering engine that these guys made (if they''ll publish there techniques in a paper or I get a job with their Flight Sim team). And also, I didn''t find a mature cumulonimbus cloud in their gallery or video. So I guess we don''t get to see any tornado[e]s, which would be a spectular image, no doubt. I have seen models being able to simulate a thunderstorm from top (cirrus, anvil) to bottom (inflow bands and flanking line) right along with a tornado. Here''s hoping that someone will leave me something cool to do in this area.


joeG



Sponsor:

#122 realmsonline   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 15 February 2004 - 01:20 AM

Are you going to post some clips of it in motion?

#123 superpig   Staff Emeritus   -  Reputation: 1825

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 15 February 2004 - 01:43 AM

[Don''t necro, realmsonline.]

#124 realmsonline   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 15 February 2004 - 03:28 AM

aye?

#125 superpig   Staff Emeritus   -  Reputation: 1825

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 15 February 2004 - 03:47 AM

The last post to this topic was 4th of June 2003, before yours. It''s against forum rules to bring up topics which have lain dormant for more than a couple of weeks (known as ''necroing'', as in ''necromancy''). I''ll let it slip because this is a useful topic, but in future please start a new topic and link to the old one instead. Most of the people posting in the old topic have probably left by now.

#126 realmsonline   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 15 February 2004 - 05:09 AM

The Rules
The GDNet Staff and Moderators are here to ensure a quality experience for all members of the forum. If you break these rules, then you can expect to be put warned or even Banned from the forums (see below). Keeping this in mind, the rules of the forums are as follows:
Topics that you post should be relevant to the forum in which you are posting. This includes posting non-game development related topics in the GDNet Lounge.
Insults and personal attacks on other members will not be tolerated. You are free to disagree and argue with someone else, but insults are where we draw the line.
Posting someone''s personal address or phone number without their consent is forbidden, and may land you in legal trouble as well.
Software piracy is banned from these forums. Posts asking for pirated software or for how to find pirated software will not be tolerated.
Offensive language should be avoided. The forum software automatically censors some words, and GDNet Staff and Moderators may censor others.
Do not spam. It will be deleted as soon as a Staff member or Moderator sees it.
Do not start a topic that condones illegal activities or activities that tend to incite flame wars, such as: drug use, killing, warez, theft, race, nationality, sex, and religion.
Do not use the forums as a personal messenger service. That is what email is for.
People engaging in abusive activities will have their accounts terminated and be permanently banned from GameDev.net. Furthermore, if necessary, we will take whatever steps are needed to report you to your ISP for abuse, and won''t hesitate to contact law enforcement authorities should the nature of the abuse warrant it.
Any posts containing language or images that are inappropriate for viewing at work, at public terminals, or by children are likely to be removed. Members who continually post such things will be warned and eventually banned.
Anyone posting pornographic images, or any other images of an extremely graphic, offensive nature, whether in their original format or modified in some way (such as pixelating them or posting them as ASCII "art"), or posting links to sites containing such images, will be subject to being Banned.


Than someone needs to update their rules because I dont see that listed anywhere.
L8ter

#127 superpig   Staff Emeritus   -  Reputation: 1825

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 15 February 2004 - 06:05 AM

Point. I''ll pass it on. In the meantime, consider it an unwritten rule.

#128 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Likes

Posted 19 February 2004 - 01:19 PM

What a ridiculous freakin rule :@

#129 Code_Dark   Members   -  Reputation: 427

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 19 February 2004 - 01:52 PM

The thread that keeps on giving!

- CD



Brought to you by Code_Dark

#130 voodoo_john   Members   -  Reputation: 140

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 February 2004 - 06:35 AM

Yeah I agree that rule is a bit silly. Does that mean you can''t ask a question on an article discussion thread if it''s been dead for a couple of weeks?

#131 UltimaX   Members   -  Reputation: 467

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 21 February 2004 - 03:59 PM

The GDNet Staff and Moderators are here to ensure a quality experience for all members of the forum
How can that be when we are not allowed to resurrect a thread after a couple of weeks? If it''s a legit resurrect than whats the big deal? Especially this one, this is the best thread on this site! I can see pornographic material, links to warez, etc., but this?

>>Point. I''ll pass it on. In the meantime, consider it an unwritten rule<<
To whom Kevin? I''m sorry SP, but I just don''t see the reason behind it? What''s your reason? Is it harming anyone? Is it offending someones race, religion, color, etc? Is it causing a business to lose profit due to illegal sharing? I just don''t see why?

And voodoo_john, the answer to your question is yes. Look here: http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=198380

BTW:
I''m not trying to be a jerk. I''m just curious to find out why?

-UltimaX-
Ariel Productions

"You wished for a white christmas... Now go shovel your wishes!"

#132 Stick   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 21 February 2004 - 06:41 PM

quote:
Original post by superpig
Most of the people posting in the old topic have probably left by now.


That should answer your question.

If it were me, I''d let a thread go if it was two weeks old, but this isn''t two weeks...

#133 hanstt   Members   -  Reputation: 259

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 21 February 2004 - 10:05 PM

I don''t mind old threads being pulled up, IF the question is related to the subject rather than to a person (unfortunately, in this case it was the latter). A question about if anybody has ideas how to solve a problem is ok, but asking Yann how he did a thing is a wee bit off (and he really won''t answer...). If everybody keeps sky-related questions in here, preferrably on clouds ''cause that''s what the starter asked about, then people can find lots of good resources in one place. Searching would work too of course.
Also, good threads pulled back might be a good way to introduce some material to newcomers who are just out for a look-around and it might inspire them.

Necroing should be kept low, though sometimes it can be a good thing.

#134 superpig   Staff Emeritus   -  Reputation: 1825

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 21 February 2004 - 11:25 PM

The approach people should adopt is to create a new thread with a link to the old, I''ve said this before. That allows people to quickly look at the new information without trawling through the old if they don''t want to. Article Discussion and GDS Feedback are exceptions because you can''t create new topics in their forums.

It''s something of a conceptual modelling thing. If a thread has died, that is because nobody has anything more to say; the discussion has ended. If you want to talk about something in it, you are starting a new discussion. Thus, you should be starting a new thread.

Since the events in this thread, Dave has issued a couple of memos to the mods on necro policy, so I won''t push on-topic necros too hard in future. But I would prefer that you adopt the new-thread-and-link approach I mentioned above, for a number of reasons.

Now, either the necro discussion stops after this post, or I lock the thread. If you take issue with what I''ve said, email me.

Oh, and voodoo_john, don''t think I can''t see you posting anonymously both here and in the Enginuity thread.


Richard "Superpig" Fine
Smoother than a greased baby
[TBRF|GP&T|Enginuity1|Enginuity2|Enginuity3|Enginuity4|Enginuity5]


#135 Dmytry   Members   -  Reputation: 1148

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 22 February 2004 - 07:23 PM

I sure that necromancy issue on gamedev.net could be solved by comparation with all other forums i know where this is not an issue.

I think ,necromancy became a problem only because "blahblah" posters realized that if they posts blahblah to old topic,it makes more effect than blahblah posted as new topic,because when moderator deletes blahblah,thread remains popped up(correct me if i'm are wrong).

The one advantage of "new with reference to old" over necro that moderator could delete post and old topic are pushed back to graves.But why not just change formu software a bit that lastpost date= post date of last message(so if necroing message are deleted,thread are pushed back to grave). Really,it shouldn't be so hard to change forum soft,unless forum soft are over-bloated.

Also, do you know that in usenet,mesages are also passed with references?
With references to many messages that was before this message,not to one.Like last page of necroed topic.

Really,there's not so much difference between last page of old topic with links "1,2,3,4,5,6" on page and new topic with link to old topic with link to older topic,except only that i have to make more mouse clicks.

So IMHO,sorry,but "new with reference to old" are very stupid idea. Same necro with more mouse clicks required if you want to find what's it originally about.

Really,what, it's so hard to just test in your head what's happen after adding that damn feature?

realmsonline:
subject: 'Sky' , 0 replies.
text:

Original thread "Sky-rendering techniques" Are you going to post some clips of it in motion?



(mods anyway have to say "don't necro",isn't it?.
But we all will just laugh )

Note that when i see
subject: 'Sky-rendering techniques' , 700 replies.
i know that it's necro,and,if i'm not interesting,i may not look at it.And else i don't know if it's necro .

Also, after clicking on Original Thread you have to click on "Original Thread" again and again to find what's OP said.

So "new with reference to old" will not solve any problems.


...

[edited by - Dmytry on February 23, 2004 2:25:23 AM]

#136 voodoo_john   Members   -  Reputation: 140

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 February 2004 - 09:02 AM

quote:
Original post by superpig
Oh, and voodoo_john, don't think I can't see you posting anonymously both here and in the Enginuity thread.



Oh really? Amd you know this how? Because the same IP is logged against the same posts? Well, yeah then that _definately_ proves it 's me....

The fact of the matter is that people around here get "promoted" to Mods and suddenly it's concentration camp time.

[Edit] How about less forum trawling and more writing? [/Edit]

[edited by - voodoo_john on February 23, 2004 4:04:04 PM]

#137 voodoo_john   Members   -  Reputation: 140

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 February 2004 - 09:11 AM

quote:
Original post by UltimaX


And voodoo_john, the answer to your question is yes. Look here: http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=198380



Well reading what (unsurprusingly) SP says to the guy: "Necroing a post just to bash Blender? Not a good way to impress me, cgshade." just proves in my mind what other people have said about SP''s holier-than-thou attitude. Seems that Modship has just served to re-affirm this.

Time for a fork.




#138 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Likes

Posted 23 February 2004 - 09:16 AM

This is not the lounge. Rules were always a bit different here. It''s about exchanging information, not about someone digging up old crap in the line of "nope". When Yann moderated this forum, things like necro threads never were an issue (and we had almost no offtopic threads on the forum, unlike now). Someone posted the idea of a gamedev Wiki in the suggestion forum. How would you handle your no-necro policy there ? It''s impossible, because Wikis encourage necroing as an active way of completing, updating and possibly correcting information. It''s a good idea, and I don''t see why this should be different right here and right now.


#139 superpig   Staff Emeritus   -  Reputation: 1825

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 February 2004 - 10:50 PM

quote:
Original post by superpig
Now, either the necro discussion stops after this post, or I lock the thread. If you take issue with what I''ve said, email me.







Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS