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

[Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com]

after a chat with Matt we agreed that there are two areas to take care
now or eventually:

1- masking tools: simple, independant from 3D view, interactive,
probably work inside *image editor*. rotobezier, power windows, etc go
here

2- integration of 3D scene: this should be done by making a better
*blender internal*. the renderer should handle non obstructive
rendering of custom jobs, like it does with material preview renders.
It should handle different cameras or resolution (to be able to render
outside of main view's screenspace) and it should be able to render
simple geometry like shadeless objects or normals as fast as possible.
This is actually simmilar to an old design of mine that uses the 3D
view instead of the image editor but still focuses on tweaking Blender
Internal to be more flexible

https://docs0.google.com/drawings/edit?id=1VLs3SkOjn9TVYtet0KvNTVLWvcgaH4gVYIUrMOMp_xo&authkey=CIK37ecL&hl=en

what Pete is doing is probably a mix between the two and that's
probably a bad idea :s

cheers!

Daniel Salazar
3Developer.com



On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:04 AM, Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com
<zanqdo at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
>>>
>>
>