I am interested to see if anyone else would love to see a "functions forum" erected here at Planetside. All this forum would be is a place to talk about FUNCTIONS! It is obvious that the understanding of functions will really bring the users Terragen skill to the next level. I think its a topic broad enough for its own forum. Furthermore the separation of function talk and general Terragen talk would benefit all. People looking for function information have trouble finding information on the main discussion because of all the other general questions that come up. And people that do not want to deal with functions could care less about function threads! Discuss....
At the moment I don't understand anything from functions. Don't know how to use, what can be done with them... I will not be much of a help in a forum I guess, but I'm interested in the matter, so maybe that's a start :)
math challenged here with an aye ::)
Yes I think it is a very good idea for all of us, at what ever skill level as it will help us all to grow to the next level. Weather we are challenged or not, and most of us are /winks like me and others That is a very good idea.
DT
Yes, this I think this is an excellent idea. Examples of using the different functions would be great for making references while creating scenes.
Bob (choronr)
I can only agree! ::)
The irresistable forces of peer pressure can mean only one thing, I agree.
Well, I DONT agree..... *looks around at the nasty looks from the rest of the community*..... errrr.... OK then I agree ;D
Maybe it's also a good idea to subdivide the "Terragen 2 Discussion" section further. For example into sections like "clouds/atmo". "terrain displacements", "Functions", "Rendering", etc. etc. The main Terragen 2 Discussion section contains loads of topics and it's sometimes hard to find your specific info in the jungle of topics. I think to make it more clarifying further subdivision could aid in this.
How do you guys feel about this?
This is just in addition to the idea for a functions forum. So yes I agree ;D
If everybody likes the idea, then I like the idea, too :D
Agree
Seems unnecessary to me. The forums have a 'Search' function, after all.
(Peer pressure be damned.)
;D
After hearing ProjectX say he was possibly willing to write some math functions to help with the TG2 functions, I'm totally ready for this. I especially think that this is an area that is distinct enough to deserve a forum category by itself. The possibilities in this area alone are endless for TG2.
Sorry Harvey. 8)
Just trying to be the token contrarian. It's a dirty job, but someone has to do it.
;D
If Harvey is against it, I am against it, too ,)
;D ;D ;D
Well if Harvey and Volker are against it then I retract my affermative statement above... I would like the forum members to know that I am now against the idea ;D
although.... actually, I think its a really good idea ;D
waffle waffle waffle waffle
;D
Thanks. I've already had breakfast. ;D
Right... Stop this, it's far to silly >:(
Mind you, if you have any maple syrup for theose waffles Harvey....
Doh.......
I think I'll take my pigments, pallet, brushes and linseed oil and go home.
You could call it "Function Junction" . ;D It may be really helpful to some but I don't really use functions because I can pretty much get the effects I use most often use as in (Southwestern US scenes) from surface, distribution, Image map, fractal noise and displacement Shaders. But that's just my preference plus all I know is: 0+0=0 I think? I suppose I could find a use for them at some point? In the end I guess it's really up to Planetside.
Yea, learning how to use those higher end functions is like learning a new language! I just don't know where to start. Many thanks to the pioneers who've ventured out and found out how they work. I've tried a few things myself, but no luck. Ohh, and I am talking the mathematical functions here.
Honestly, at this point, I don't see myself using them past a few levels, as what they've been show to generate so far is 'structured' stuff. This is amazing in its own right, but they don't tend to have that random fractal look that noise can create, which is more my style. Of course I am not writing off the idea of a 'structured' death-star like planetary surface (which would be amazing - any takers)!? 8)
Moodflow, I'm wondering about the 'structured idea' with functions, since some of the functions allow randomization and inclusion of noise. It could be the functions are endless.
Quote from: calico on July 30, 2007, 12:56:29 PM
Moodflow, I'm wondering about the 'structured idea' with functions, since some of the functions allow randomization and inclusion of noise. It could be the functions are endless.
Ya, I am definitely not discounting them... I think they would be great for doing currently unknown things, especially mixed in with currently known things.
What I was really trying to say in my last post was - I have no clue on how to use them yet ;D I should just face the truth... heheh
Yes. I understand. I understand the little bit that has been done here with canyons and the voronoi, but little more than that. It would be excellent to have a resource page for this kind of mathematics that allowed us to step up to TG2 functionality...is what I mean. :P
Quote from: moodflow on July 30, 2007, 01:06:00 PM
What I was really trying to say in my last post was - I have no clue on how to use them yet ;D I should just face the truth... heheh
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on July 30, 2007, 06:06:25 AM
Maybe it's also a good idea to subdivide the "Terragen 2 Discussion" section further. For example into sections like "clouds/atmo". "terrain displacements", "Functions", "Rendering", etc. etc. The main Terragen 2 Discussion section contains loads of topics and it's sometimes hard to find your specific info in the jungle of topics. I think to make it more clarifying further subdivision could aid in this.
How do you guys feel about this?
This is just in addition to the idea for a functions forum. So yes I agree ;D
I agree with that, but at a later date. Right now the community is young and if we cut up the forums to much then we will be really hurting the community. Why I suggest the functions is it is so specialized, but yet so general. Functions can be used in any part of Terragen, but yet they have a nearly endless list of possibilities. By stratifying functions from the general discussion we will be getting rid of all the mathematical jargon from the general forum while grouping together all of it into another forum. I really think it would be a good idea and act as a catalyst to the learning of not only functions but Terragen as a whole...
This is a great idea!
So any opinions from the staff? It seems like a good majority of the community is for it!
It's a worthwhile idea and it is under consideration. I'll post an update when we make a decision.
- Oshyan
Good stuff, thanks for considering it!
After examining the actual number of function-related threads here it seems like there's really not enough traffic with that specific subject to justify a separate area at this point. It is easy enough to ignore function-related threads here, and not difficult to find them should you be particularly interested.
Furthermore it may be difficult to differentiate a function-related thread from a "normal" one in many cases as the functions are not necessarily separate from the other nodes and they in fact work only in combination with them. This would be an issue both for the original poster and for the moderators. Threads also often drift off their original topics, which could cause further confusion. I'm sure everyone would agree that creating a distinction and then not actually seeing it realized in people's posting habits would not be advantageous as people would look in the expected place for function information but not find all of it.
We can consider adding a custom message icon for functions (see the top of the Post form), or people can use a prefix such as [Functions] on their posts if they desire, but ultimately further fragmentation of the forum at this time doesn't seem like the best solution. We will continue to monitor the amount of function-related discussion and will reconsider this in the future if it becomes needed.
- Oshyan
Is there any way to tag posts? Only had a very quick look at the SMF site... but if it's possible, or someone has written a mod for it then it might be useful.
There are some tag mods available, for example http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=579 but the question then is who does the tagging? ;) If we can trust users to remember (or know in the first place) to mark their own messages then a simple custom "Message Icon" would suffice (see top of the post editor under Subject - these show up next to message subjects in the board message list). I'm glad to work on something like that if it seems helpful. I don't think you can search or sort on the message icon types though so it might be less useful than tagging...
- Oshyan
I think just an icon so we can spot it quickly when we're trawling through the threads will do. Well, at least for me anyway. Thanks for considering it!
Well, I must admit that I am a bit disappointed in the decision, but it is warranted so I cant be too sad! I like the idea of an icon because when people tag everyone seems to have their own tagging style. I like the idea of every functional thread being labeled with an icon, it will create similarity :D.
I like the icon labeling idea, too.
Ok, I'll work on creating a message icon for it. But everyone will have to remember to use it, and threads with mixed content, or whose subject was not Functions to begin with will never be marked properly. In other words don't rely on the label as a definitive indication of the content of a thread.
- Oshyan
"Functions" and "Nodes" are different (functions being a subset of nodes). A "nodes" area might be more likely to get significant traffic...
- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on August 02, 2007, 03:27:02 PM
"Functions" and "Nodes" are different (functions being a subset of nodes). A "nodes" area might be more likely to get significant traffic...
- Oshyan
I personally would not mind that. Actually I am sure it would be better then a functions forum.
Something more like a "Node Network" forum then? I'll discuss that idea and see what we come up with.
- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on August 02, 2007, 03:43:34 PM
Something more like a "Node Network" forum then? I'll discuss that idea and see what we come up with.
- Oshyan
Yes, that would really simplify things as well, it wouldnt be hard to figure out if a certain topic "should" be in the node forum. I am thinking that will be even more beneficial...
Which topic would not go into the node-forum? ??? This one!
Quote from: Volker Harun on August 02, 2007, 04:02:33 PM
Which topic would not go into the node-forum? ??? This one!
Well I think the description of the forum would be working IN the node network not just in one node...
Quote from: Oshyan on August 02, 2007, 03:43:34 PM
Something more like a "Node Network" forum then? I'll discuss that idea and see what we come up with.
- Oshyan
I think that's what we all had in mind really, or at least, it's what I had in mind.
It's important to be clear that the "function nodes" are specific types of nodes, generally basic/fundamental mathematical operators that need to be connected together to do more sophisticated things. The function nodes are blue in the node network, differentiating them from other nodes. So that is what we presumed was being referred to and why it seemed like too narrow a focus.
We'll consider a dedicated "node network" discussion area for the future. For now we'd like to see how discussions in that area evolve and grow in the single existing discussion forum.
- Oshyan
Sorry if this is a bit..Off Topic..but what do you use the math functions for?
I can certainly understand Oshyan's concerns.. and yes tagging is only as good as the tags people put on their posts, whether it's multiple tags or an icon.
e.g. you expect posts with files in the file sharing section.... you post a file of an interesting terrain that is made up largely of functions but you also throw in some interesting surfaces and lighting. You could have a forum on each but then you'd be cross posting or navigating through numerous forums.
Quote from: bigben on August 02, 2007, 07:18:38 PM
I can certainly understand Oshyan's concerns.. and yes tagging is only as good as the tags people put on their posts, whether it's multiple tags or an icon.
e.g. you expect posts with files in the file sharing section.... you post a file of an interesting terrain that is made up largely of functions but you also throw in some interesting surfaces and lighting. You could have a forum on each but then you'd be cross posting or navigating through numerous forums.
Ideally, the node forum would contain threads detailing how and why certain nodes were used in creating an interesting effect, as well as offering help to those who are stuck with trying to create an effect, all the while being easily visible for those that wan't to learn more about nodes and expand the variety of techniques they have available to them. The actual file would be posted in the file sharing area, and the any resulting images in image-sharing. Hm... cross-linking threads would be really useful here, but I'm not sure i've ever seen it done in a forum so I doubt it's possible, or at least easy.