Comments for "Image_3D"

» Submit Your Comment
Comments are only accepted during the "Proposal" phase. This proposal is currently in the "Finished" phase.
» Comments
  • Philippe Jausions  [2005-06-17 18:53 UTC]

    Without any doubt, you should use a driver-based approach for the extension used: GD, ImageMagick, MING...

  • Justin Patrin  [2005-06-17 19:12 UTC]

    Sounds like a great package. I haven't checked the code myself but is this a real-time or ray tracing package? I assume it's real-time as ray tracing in PHP would be incredibly slow, but I'd like to make sure. What shading does it support? Flat/Gourad/Phong?
  • Tobias Schlitt  [2005-06-18 14:47 UTC]

    Of course the pure rendering part will be changed to a driver based architecture. As we allready stated in the proposal we eventually plan Flash generation.

    Of course it's a realtime engine.
  • Nobody is Here  [2005-06-18 15:58 UTC]

    I would like to know if it will be possible to render an isometric projection of the 3d world. I am the maintainer of Image_Isometric but have several problems since the isometric projection has some really tricky implications to the rendering order of the polygons... beside of this your package looks much more advanced over my solution and i will be happy to drop the development of Image_Isometric if Image_3D will be accepted by the PEAR community.
  • Tobias Schlitt  [2005-06-19 11:52 UTC]

    We currently have slight problems with the rendering order of polygones, but Kore already mentioned to be thinking about implementing Z-buffering. Thought, the currently rendered images look quite accurate.
  • Jesper Veggerby  [2005-07-08 17:19 UTC]

    I find this package cool, and I can see the prospects in using it in fx Image_Graph to create cool 3D graphs.

    I just think that we're all re-inventing the wheel, by implementing our own drivers. I have (a long time ago, and no comments for an equally long time) proposed the to create a package for drivers (Image_Canvas) which can be used inter-packages. I think it would make a whole lot more sense to have a common set of drivers instead of Image_Graph, Image_3D and who-else-knows who have their own implementation (think of having to support one interface and then you instantly support n different formats, nice?)