This isn't available yet, is it?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On
> Behalf Of Thomas Helzle
> Sent: 03 July 2006 23:13
> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> Subject: Re: Replacing the shadertree? Possible?
>
> The first time I looked at that Mental Images page about Mental Mill, I
> seemed to have missed the pdf about the inner workings (sorry Luc-
> Eric). Now someone made me aware of it and I really recommend reading
> it to everyone who is interested in this stuff:
>
>
> http://www.mentalimages.com/2_4_mentalmill/index.html
> And a direct link to the pdf:
> http://www.mentalimages.com/2_4_mentalmill/mental_mill_functional_overv
> iew-Januar4-2006.pdf
>
> Basically it describes Meta SL, a shader language that creates shaders
> that work for hardware as well as software rendering.
> And Mental Mill is a standalone or integrated shadertree that is able
> to create metashaders from phenomena with a graphical interface, where
> you define which in- and outputs you want the user to see.
> So it combines "SPDL hacking" like in the current XSI Blog topic with
> the "grouping" idea we had in this thread before in a graphical
> interface It tries to allow high level acces for artist and if you want
> you can get down into the guts as well.
>
> Depending on the things you use, the shaders will work on consoles or
> graphics hardware as well as with software rendering or a blend between
> them, so Meta SL is somehow meant as a language to end all languages
> for shaders...
> Mental Mill is said to be able to export the built shaders to every
> possible language if needed.
>
> That should become interesting!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Thomas Helzle
>
>
>
> If this all works as advertised, is nicely implemented and fited into
> XSI and is fast, it should answer a lot of the questions.
>
> On Mon, 03 Jul 2006 14:45:20 +0200, Jordi Bares <jordibares(at)the-
> mill.com> wrote:
>
> > No question it has been a good tool and we still have plenty of road
> > in front but my thinking goes in two directions;
> >
> > 1 - Make it more easy and readable without forcing us to go so
> > granular unless we want. Meaning cleverer and optimised mega-shaders
> > that have a much broad design and are called thru less obscure names.
> >
> > 2 - If we need to go down, then bring the lot. A good example of how
> > far we could go is VOPs in Houdini, a graphical node-based interface
> > that goes as far as you need and with access to everything in the
> rest
> > of the software.
> >
> > At the end we use our own monolithic shaders like crazy because
> simply
> > we can't do that with phenomena and these building blocks are not
> > optimised so render times skyrocket every now and then.
> >
> > hope that makes it clearer.
> >
> > jb
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in
> body:
> unsubscribe xsi
>
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
