From the getting started section: > Terminals are part of the MacOS since it is Linux-based. This is not true. MacOS is based on Unix.
Correct. This could be modified)
Scratchapixel 4.0, Learn Computer Graphics Programming
51–56 of 56 posts
Re: Scratchapixel 4.0, Learn Computer Graphics Programming
#52Honestly - mixed feelings. This looks more like a way to build up academic/collegiate level knowledge on computer graphics than a way of familiarizing yourself with shaders/rendering techniques. It is also woefully incomplete.
Hum to familiarize yourself with shaders/rendering techniques, do you see any other way but to build academic/collegiate level knowledge on computer graphics? Would love to understand how you intent to achieve results without knowledge.
Re: Scratchapixel 4.0, Learn Computer Graphics Programming
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Until you can observe that light doesn't travel instantaneously, it would be consistent to believe that a beam leaves your eyes, bounces off a surface, and informs you (as though it were a limb, perhaps) when it hits a light source.
The more I think about it the weirder it gets. It’s day time, the sun is up, it’s a cloudless day. Ambient light is bouncing all over, including into a south facing window (i.e. no direct sunlight.) How does the Eye Light Emitter do its job in this case? Now, I don’t mean “this concept is impossible” because that’s clear. I’m genuinely curious how this would have been explained by someone at the time.
You should read scratchapixel really)
https://www.scratchapixel.com/lessons/3d-basic-rendering/int...
In the real world light travels from the light source to the eye. But this lesson xplains that simulating this with a computer is not efficient. A more efficient technique is to follow the path of light but in reverse, starting from the eye and waking back to the lights making up the scene. Again read the lesson(s) it's all explained and that's why the lessons are there in the first place.
Re: Scratchapixel 4.0, Learn Computer Graphics Programming
#54have been waiting for the texturing chapter to be done for what feels like years now... i actually think it has been years.
Will work on that next then). It will be cool -- and worth the wait. Sorry if the project got on stall for some years. Life can be difficult some times and it was for me for all these years. Yet I put my heart into writing what's about 500.000 words now which is equivalent of roughly 8 books of 200 pages. All this for free since 2009). I understand your frustration, but hopefully with time and the community support (don't expect any of the corporations out there to help us in that process) we will get these topics covered. But as I am no millionaire, I can only work at the speed at which I can feed myself.
Re: Scratchapixel 4.0, Learn Computer Graphics Programming
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Until you can observe that light doesn't travel instantaneously, it would be consistent to believe that a beam leaves your eyes, bounces off a surface, and informs you (as though it were a limb, perhaps) when it hits a light source.
Except that would never explain shadows. Why does my eye beam not let me see what is in shadow, if there is no such thing as light beams coming from a light source?
Because the beam coming from your eyes and hitting a shadow would never reach a light source (you could say it gets absorbed before it reaches a light source).
Re: Scratchapixel 4.0, Learn Computer Graphics Programming
#56have been waiting for the texturing chapter to be done for what feels like years now... i actually think it has been years.
Will work on that next then). It will be cool -- and worth the wait. Sorry if the project got on stall for some years. Life can be difficult some times and it was for me for all these years. Yet I put my heart into writing what's about 500.000 words now which is equivalent of roughly 8 books of 200 pages. All this for free since 2009). I understand your frustration, but hopefully with time and the community support (…
sounds good!, i do very much appreciate all that you have written so far. its just that texturing is the one thing i really do find difficult and its frustrating its not there :) -- thanks again for all your hard work.