Demoscene vs. Processing vs. Motion Design
category: general [glöplog]
So we are back to demoscene 101 to discuss what a demo is? Silly. :)
That might be true for less than 1% of the people, but not the vast majority.
Quote:
Besides being a culture, Demoscene is also a lifestyle.
That might be true for less than 1% of the people, but not the vast majority.
psonice: Sure, but DirectX or OpenGL subsystem support is considered to be part of the standard OS, while Processing is not. At least that is what I see as different between the two :)
What las said.
The definition of "realtime" is, that the processing of the input information does not take longer than the expected waiting time for the output information.
In most movies, 25 FPS is the expected frame rate, so you have 40 ms of time per frame. Realtime would be, that the time needed to generate the next frame should not exceed 40 ms.
What the expected framerate in demos is, is not clearly defined, but should be well above 30 FPS in order to satisfy the expectations of the audience. So if the platform/computer, for which the demo was made, provides such a high framerate, then it is a realtime production.
If it doesn't run that smooth in your computer, it doesnt make the demo less "relatime".
The definition of "realtime" is, that the processing of the input information does not take longer than the expected waiting time for the output information.
In most movies, 25 FPS is the expected frame rate, so you have 40 ms of time per frame. Realtime would be, that the time needed to generate the next frame should not exceed 40 ms.
What the expected framerate in demos is, is not clearly defined, but should be well above 30 FPS in order to satisfy the expectations of the audience. So if the platform/computer, for which the demo was made, provides such a high framerate, then it is a realtime production.
If it doesn't run that smooth in your computer, it doesnt make the demo less "relatime".
Quote:
One could also argue that the demoscene usually produces works that run from a self-contained executable, which is not the case with most Processing stuff.
But one can distribute the processing runtime/player along with the scripts. Just as one would distribute Demopaya or Werkkzeug projects along with their corresponding players. I don't see any difference there.
Quote:
I don't see any difference there.
Then you should perhaps start counting how many demos/intros are made with Werkkzeug (the public version) and divide that by the number of total demos/intros.. which is also why I put "usually" in the sentence you just quoted.
...
Who cares? Just make demos and/or other cool stuff.
Knos: The argument being that most demos are in fact self contained (with the exclusion of DirectX and such). Don't you agree?
Who cares? Just make demos and/or other cool stuff.
Who cares? Just make demos and/or other cool stuff.
I thought demoscene was about non-interactive real time demonstrations. Processing, when in real time, is usually interactive. And motion design, well, is not in real time.
Oh, and the benefits of the non-interactive part is that you can cheat and do those interactive effects much more interesting (this point is hard to illustrate).
To illustrate trace's point, get hold of some kind of isosurface generator with a ton of parameters, and play with it. Now watch tracie.
Quote:
Then you should perhaps start counting how many demos/intros are made with Werkkzeug (the public version) and divide that by the number of total demos/intros.. which is also why I put "usually" in the sentence you just quoted.
That number is x / y with x equal to or greater than 1 and y greater than x, still I don't see how this makes a script bundled with processing in a single distribution (or even a single executable) less "self contained".
bruce, that's because you're looking at it from a sane point of view, not a purist demoscene one. Bitching about this stuff is the modern day equivalent of "OMFG IT'S NOT WRITTEN IN ASM... LOL".
no need to oppose them... the demoscene will go ahead by embracing those new forms of computer arts :p
I also find that most Processing stuff does not have custom made music, which is sort of important for musicians in the scene. :)
7
The problem of viewing someone else's closed software product as your platform is that there will be limits that you can't overcome, and you're completely at their mercy. Also, if what you're learning isn't transferrable then it's a lot of wasted time.
As far as *I*'m concerned, the most valuable part of this is to show off how clever/creative/skilled/insane you are, and it's the totally insane stuff that grabs people's attention, things where you had to go to ridiculous lengths to make something new and never-done-before. You can't get that never-done-before freshness if all your effects are hardcoded and all YOU get to add is models and camera paths. Now processing is obviously more than just that, but werkkzeugg without the source code isn't.
Out of the things I've done, the textmode stuff impresses technical people most, because there's no DirectX fucking tutorial code that I can swap out models for and add music to to make it. (Nevermind for the moment that Buz wrote the 3d engine and it uses libcaca to convert the 2d buffer output to colored text)
As far as *I*'m concerned, the most valuable part of this is to show off how clever/creative/skilled/insane you are, and it's the totally insane stuff that grabs people's attention, things where you had to go to ridiculous lengths to make something new and never-done-before. You can't get that never-done-before freshness if all your effects are hardcoded and all YOU get to add is models and camera paths. Now processing is obviously more than just that, but werkkzeugg without the source code isn't.
Out of the things I've done, the textmode stuff impresses technical people most, because there's no DirectX fucking tutorial code that I can swap out models for and add music to to make it. (Nevermind for the moment that Buz wrote the 3d engine and it uses libcaca to convert the 2d buffer output to colored text)
GbND: there's an obvious explanation imho : beyond the great nostalgic feeling textmode does impress technically because you make something old and typically limited that people have known well, evolve into something fresh with new coding/cpu/ideas/skills etc... the comparison with the past is easy ;)
After reading your posts, I've a final answer, that is valid for me, thanks so much.
First, I don't think "self-contained" is important nowadays. Flash demos are today considered demos, java demos are considered demos, demos using, let say, SDL, are considered demos an so on. Oldschool days were different about this, but now it doesn't look to matter.
Then, what trace said is very coherent and true.
And finally, the most important thing I've read is "target machine". Realtime for the target machine. Ok. By itself, being "realtime for the target machine" is not enough to answer my question but, here it is my final answer, the one that makes me happy:
The key difference is that demos are designed with the main intention to be realtime. So intention is the important thing here. The artistical part of the demos are limited and adapted to the technical limitations. It doesn't look to be the same in processing scene or motion design.
So well, for me, question answered. Thanks so much.
First, I don't think "self-contained" is important nowadays. Flash demos are today considered demos, java demos are considered demos, demos using, let say, SDL, are considered demos an so on. Oldschool days were different about this, but now it doesn't look to matter.
Then, what trace said is very coherent and true.
And finally, the most important thing I've read is "target machine". Realtime for the target machine. Ok. By itself, being "realtime for the target machine" is not enough to answer my question but, here it is my final answer, the one that makes me happy:
The key difference is that demos are designed with the main intention to be realtime. So intention is the important thing here. The artistical part of the demos are limited and adapted to the technical limitations. It doesn't look to be the same in processing scene or motion design.
So well, for me, question answered. Thanks so much.
The definition of demos is that they are the descendants of cracktros.
@texel: what you mean with:
why u dont say DX he? grrr >8^|
Quote:
[...] demos using, let say, SDL, are considered demos an so on. [...]
why u dont say DX he? grrr >8^|
because SDL has for a long time be the target of random attacks by people who think a dynamic library has less right to be used when it does not come from a commercial company responsible for manufacturing operating systems.
Now I've seen one processing snippet and thus I am an expert on the theme.These things come to mind which makes the demo scene prods and scene something else :
- Flashy credit sequence in the middle of the art
- Greetings in the middle of the art
- Occasionally bundled with cracked games
- Target platform limitations ( Limited colour palette, Slow processors)
- Size limitations
- Invitros
- Insults against other groups in productions
- Sinus scrollers that go on forever
- Competitions with voting by drunk people
- Silly handles which were made when 12-14
- The people who win the compos sometimes sleep in garbage or on the toilet
- Has grown naturally from its cracktro origins since the 80s.
- People tend to not understand why the hell people do it
I put a big questionmark here because I'm not very motion design or processing.
Maybe some day they will all be the same?
- Flashy credit sequence in the middle of the art
- Greetings in the middle of the art
- Occasionally bundled with cracked games
- Target platform limitations ( Limited colour palette, Slow processors)
- Size limitations
- Invitros
- Insults against other groups in productions
- Sinus scrollers that go on forever
- Competitions with voting by drunk people
- Silly handles which were made when 12-14
- The people who win the compos sometimes sleep in garbage or on the toilet
- Has grown naturally from its cracktro origins since the 80s.
- People tend to not understand why the hell people do it
I put a big questionmark here because I'm not very motion design or processing.
Maybe some day they will all be the same?
