[Bf-committers] Geometry in Compositor or Quadrangulation???

Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com zanqdo at gmail.com
Tue Apr 12 08:04:17 CEST 2011


to elaborate the problems with everything that has to be with scene
data and compositing together are speed/interactivity and integration.
what do you suggest?

Daniel Salazar
3Developer.com



On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 11:58 PM, Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com
<zanqdo at gmail.com> wrote:
> What do you suggest? (not focusing on the pure topic of masking)
>
> Daniel Salazar
> 3Developer.com
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Matt Ebb <matt at mke3.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com
>> <zanqdo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Indeed! :) *but!* there are other uses for having a geometry node in
>>> the compositor like bringing geometry normals, vectors, alphas and
>>> what not and all interactive (no need for regular render). It's what
>>> other compositors do to integrate the 3D view with the compositor. We
>>> can see this as a step of integration. What do you think Matt?
>>
>> I think it's a bad idea. Blender already has a renderer and that's
>> what it's for. Duplicating code to make an entirely separate renderer
>> that's only used in the comp would end up in a world of
>> overcomplicated pain. If there are problems with the workflow of
>> rendering elements to be used in comp, then that should be worked on
>> itself, I don't think the solution is to ignore it and build an
>> entirely separate thing.
>>
>> But that's all putting the cart way before the horse anyway, when so
>> much of blender's compositor is still at quite a basic level for 2d
>> manipulations.
>>
>> Matt
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>
>


More information about the Bf-committers mailing list