New Fish Models

[Wizwad]

YAY! Delighted to hear it, Jim.

[rctneil]

Hey Jim, any chance of a few screenshots of the new fish models being built and deisgned?

Just for a different style view about the development of MA3

[Jim Sachs]

There's seldom anything interesting to see until it's all put together. Just a bunch of hexidecimal numbers on the screen with an occasional header. Here's a grab of the screen I happen to be lookiing at right now from the Yellow Tang (the models are about 3000 lines each).

4;332,330,326,328;,
4;333,329,327,331;,
4;342,344,332,328;,
4;343,329,333,345;,
4;346,336,334,348;,
4;335,338,340,337;,
4;347,349,335,337;,
4;334,336,341,339;,
6;212,217,216,215,214,213;,
6;230,231,232,233,234,235;;

MeshNormals {
358;
0.099731;-0.115414;0.988298;,
-0.365069;-0.912424;-0.184954;,
-0.335409;-0.643249;-0.688281;,
-0.307242;-0.238864;-0.921166;,
-0.273106;-0.033498;-0.961400;,
-0.320791;0.263465;-0.909769;,
-0.514972;0.531775;-0.672324;,
-0.664222;0.719191;-0.203894;,
-0.870897;0.491466;-0.000127;,
-0.396798;-0.917906;0.000000;,
-0.348900;-0.768329;-0.536600;,
-0.279926;-0.439617;-0.853451;,
-0.211887;-0.021547;-0.977057;,
-0.240648;0.153382;-0.958417;,
-0.491076;0.314360;-0.812417;,
-0.710836;0.519615;-0.474038;,
-0.595284;-0.803515;0.000000;,
-0.430241;-0.583266;-0.688980;,
-0.228348;-0.218423;-0.948762;,
-0.134088;-0.028223;-0.990568;,
-0.664714;0.564253;-0.489667;,
-0.704678;0.540173;-0.460046;,
-0.411423;-0.687044;-0.598916;,
-0.255544;-0.481640;-0.838284;,
-0.160338;-0.275724;-0.947770;,
-0.007050;-0.169816;-0.985451;,
-0.326309;0.621407;-0.712303;,
-0.306784;0.542491;-0.782040;,
-0.066073;-0.635483;-0.769283;,
-0.069226;-0.573083;-0.816568;,
-0.110896;-0.444920;-0.888678;,
-0.166169;-0.064063;-0.984014;,

Also, bear in mind that even when the new fish models are finished, they probably won't look any different in a still shot. It's their behavior which will be changing dramatically.

[rctneil]

Thanks

I really can't wait to see the new behavior, how far along is it?

Will this new behavior include slightly different shapes, sizes and textures for one species when you have multiple of them in a tank

[Surferminn]

yum!! when's the next feeding?

[Jim Sachs]

This is still a long way off. I only recently made a breakthrough which makes it possible at all, and now I'm starting to move from mostly research and experimentation into the WORK (the most dreaded part). Some items are a close call. For instance, after viewing many videos and live examples of Yellow Tangs, I'm not sure if I should spend time on movable gills for the Tangs. I'm wondering if anyone would really notice.

The shapes probably won't change from one individual to the next, but the size and texture will.

[feldon34]

Going from 162 vertices to 358. Nice!

Post the .X file and I can load it up in DirectX 9 viewer.

[Surferminn]

Originally posted by Jim Sachs:

This is still a long way off. I only recently made a breakthrough which makes it possible at all, and now I'm starting to move from mostly research and experimentation into the WORK (the most dreaded part). Some items are a close call. For instance, after viewing many videos and live examples of Yellow Tangs, I'm not sure if I should spend time on movable gills for the Tangs. I'm wondering if anyone would really notice.

The shapes probably won't change from one individual to the next, but the size and texture will.  

Well, now that you've pointed it out (the gills), that's probably the first thing I'll look for... I think overall, after you're done, you'll be happy you did it. It's these little nuances that has always made a difference in your work from others.

[FrankGuy]

Originally posted by Jim Sachs:

after viewing many videos and live examples of Yellow Tangs, I'm not sure if I should spend time on movable gills for the Tangs. I'm wondering if anyone would really notice.
.  

I agree with Surferminn. Unless there are performance problems the more subtle animations the better. No one sees all of the motions at once anyway but this illusion is meant to be contemplated at length and I think that most people that buy it will do just that. I have certainly spent hours at it already and it isn't even complete! Even if people don't have the vocabulary to describe the subtlest anatomical motions or know the word operculum they will *see* the motions as more authentic no matter how subtle they are. If you listen to a piece of music rendered with cathedral organ voices exactly as sampled at the source, for example, you will hear it as very "churchy" sounding. But if just the slightest hint of vibrato, wah or flange effect is added to those same voices the same piece will be perceived in a completely different way by everyone who hears it even if they don't have the knowledge to describe the differences that they hear.

[Jim Sachs]

Well, I guess I have to move the gills, now that everyone will be watching for it.

[Wizwad]

All together now - DOH!

I agree about the detail, though. I never would have thought to look for the tail muscle rippling before I saw it v1 of the aquarium. Now I miss it. And the specks of debris in the Prolific Goldfish saver really add something to the feeling of realism, though I know we won't get that here. My point is, it's the little details which bring the whole piece to life.

[JamesMeacham2005]

I couldn't agree more. The thing I love about Jim's product is the amount of time and effort he puts into his product. I have seen alot of other "Fish" screensavers and they are not up to the quality and this is why I keep coming back to MA3.

[cjmaddy]

I also agree!

Originally posted by Wizwad:

.... I agree about the detail, though. I never would have thought to look for the tail muscle rippling before I saw it v1 of the aquarium. Now I miss it. ..... My point is, it's the little details which bring the whole piece to life.  

"Tail muscle rippling" - Ahhhh!!! ..... If only!
Thinks! .... If we apply a little pressure, do you think we could get the 'N' key (or an equivalent effect), resurrected!!!
MA2.6 is still way ahead of MA3 with respect to fluid lifelike movement, IMHO!

Originally Posted by Jim Sachs
"N" used to be "calculate Normals" in the old program, but Cliff is the only one who used that.

Of course, Mark and I both know that is not true!...

[henemly]

Originally posted by Jim Sachs:

This is still a long way off.  

Sounds like years from now.

[Surferminn]

OMGoodness. When I came on and saw the NCalc in Cliff's signature, I thought it had something to do with him being some kind of obsessive math nut or something, I had no idea it had to do with the aquarium.

[cjmaddy]

Well, you got the, obsessive nut, bit right!

[Wizwad]

I'm just gonna sit here and keep quiet!

[FrankGuy]

Originally posted by henemly:

Sounds like years from now.  

A much shorter wait in calender time I'm sure but it may *feel* that long to our favorite developer

[Nicki]

If I stare at that text long enough will it be like one of those paintings that were popular in the nineties that looked just like a random pattern but if you could get the focus just right there was Elvis on a bicycle or whatever ?

Okay silliness aside , the yellow tang is going to be the first remodelled fish , or was that just a sample you are working on , or should I just mind my own beeswax ?

No disrepect to Elvis intended . He was/is the king .

[Jim Sachs]

Yes, the Yellow Tang is the one I'm working on. Then the other Tangs, because the movement will be the same. Then the Butterflyfish, because their movement is similar. Then the Triggerfish, then the Lionfish. Then the weird little guys like the Percula Clownfish, because they are the hardest (wiggliest).