Jump to content

GDTF Forum

Recommended Posts

Dear all,

we have been producing tests files for a long time and have switched into a final version  releases now. What we are aiming for is about one library a week. What takes longest is physical attributes measurements (movement, strobing, iris...) and testing to match visualization. The rest - models preparation, geometries, media content, color-metric data, DMX... is possible to do in about two/three days.

You can find our files under our official account:

https://gdtf-share.com/user.php?name=Robe+Lighting+s.r.o.&page=fixtures

And what we are missing is feedback - we do receive some from our customers, but are open to further information in case anything strange/bad is found, so please feel free to report here or to our dedicated email libraries@robe.cz .

thank you

 

 

Edited by petrvanek
new url
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We have uploaded updated Robin megaPointe, Robin LEDWash 800X, Robin SilverScan and Robin Viva CMY to the share this week. Also, i have created a short video screen-cast on how to prepare 3D models for usage in the GDTF Builder, by using only freely available tools, see it here: http://spares.robe.cz/static/images/gdtf_video.html

EDIT: Added link to newer video, link now points to a page with embedded player.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange. Do right click → Save link as. I will upload it to YouTube or Vimeo. Anyways, i made a small mistake (didn't rotate the head one more time) so had to do a bit of time travel via copy/paste while editing, so am thinking to re-capture it, that is why i didn't upload it to any of the platforms yet...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hi David,

actually yes, i did, but i didn't manage to do the editing and producing it. I was not sure if this is interesting to someone, because it is quite manufacturer specific flow: have an existing model and "only" do modifications, optimizations to it, specifically to GDTF.

Also, fun fact, depending on exact inside rotation of the 3D model, my "quick rotations" done via swapping axes is, while 99% the same, occasionally 90° off, meaning i must use different axes for the swap/rotate.

Yes, this is Linux, i only reboot to Win when i want to see GDTF in MA3 3D or Vision, so that is a bit clumsy, although at times i use a second computer for just that, because rebooting into strange OSes is not fun. Maybe one day we'll get Linux build of MA3 :))

As for the tools i use, Freecad is really good and usable, it has quirks, but as i do not do complex editing but mostly splitting or extracting parts it is very good. So i can for example take only part of a given 3D file, like some of the front lenses, motion camera or other. The rest is done via Meshlab, where i "only" do the rotations, origin setting and mainly the mesh simplification + export. I have not found how... invested time into making this all work only in one of them or for example in Blender but there is also an issue with importing, export to 3DS and other... the workflow i have has been very fast, stable and predictable (key factors for me).

The mesh simplification is a key for GDTF. It took me some time to find Meshlab which does all these things in a fast way. There is Decimate modifier in Blender, and although i have done some (mostly animation) work in Blender, i didn't try using Blender in my GDTF work flow. I am sure C4D has something similar. Mesh simplification is really important. This is because for the most, many people presume that the model has to be as precise and as "nice" as possible, while the opposite is required for 99% of the time and we have been getting a lot of heat for "your models are too complex" over the years - if you patch few hundreds of single unit with model too detailed, planning/pre-viz tools slow down to crawl... I am sure there are custom projects where one wants to build a real-world render with textures, smooth models... and, GDTF is extensible enough to make it possible to use for that and even more in the future (for example by allowing multiple versions of models, adding textures...) , but the initial focus has been on the most required work-flow, so our [Robe] model optimizations are hitting exactly that.

🙂

P.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

C4D has the Polygon Reduction tool....great set of Axis Tools as well, when you combine with Snap, FTW!  I've already seen bloated models in the Share sites, the format does specify a max count on 3D objects...which you can adhere to and still maintain a respectable shape/model.  To me, it's more the correct scale of parts in relation to each other that provide the detail, not gobs of polys/verts.  I'm seeing some peddled on the interWeb that demonstrate that very shortcoming; poly bloat for the return in the render/visualizer.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Rex on everything above. Creating good looking models is all fine and dandy, but as Petr stated as more of the larger poly models get added, it is gonna hit the resources of the machine harder. There's no need to have detail that  is not neccessary to the output of the beam of the profiles, the body parts of the fixture should definitely be proportionate to each other and replicate the fixture the best it can to an extent, but unless you're doing rendering's, once the scene goes dark for programming, the need is not there. We build all of our models from scratch in C4D and have been able to severely lose poly's and vertices without degrading the "profile" of the fixtue body parts. If everything is built correctly, one should be able to handle over 1000 fixtures and a full scenic model build out without too much FPS loss pending hardware.   

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Worked great now, clean, no audio.  Too bad about the pipeline--OBJ--3DS, 2 programs, reorient...ugh.  C4D is fairly inexpensive for what it can deliver....

When I develop 3D fixtures; I usually have C4D open, an IDE for the .XML scripting open, and MA2 onPC/MA3D open....that's enough[4 open programs] on my desktop!

Cheers!

Rex

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/7/2020 at 12:11 AM, Hanz_Brech said:

Hello i would be intressted in the photometric data provided and included in the gdtf files compared with ies files 🙂

Hello @Hanz_Brech,

thank you for your interest.

The provided spectral data, provided in GDTF right now, are about intensity, color and color spectrum. IES files are about light/intensity distribution.

What you do with the data and how you apply is completely up to you. So feel free to grab the provided files and cross compare or apply in any other way.

Kind regards

Petr

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/8/2020 at 6:36 AM, petrvanek said:

Hello @Hanz_Brech,

thank you for your interest.

The provided spectral data, provided in GDTF right now, are about intensity, color and color spectrum. IES files are about light/intensity distribution.

What you do with the data and how you apply is completely up to you. So feel free to grab the provided files and cross compare or apply in any other way.

Kind regards

Petr 

just a quick followup, is the gdtf data of intensity the "same" like ies light/intensity so if u have gdtf u dont need ies or would it be better to combind both for a optimal solution/ more acrurancy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @Hanz_Brech,

the intensity in beam and in corresponding IES should be the same. IES gives you much more precision and information → this being details how the measurements have been taken and also about the field of the beam. But then, it depends on how much precision is needed in your application. More precision can also also more calculating power...

cheers

P.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Hi @petrvanek

I looked at some Robe fixtures to see on what geometry you put different functions.... I got confused.

Robin BMFL Spot has all functions in the Head except Pan

Robin Esprite has control channels in the base - which make sense, but also Animation wheel...

Maybe it doesn't matter, but it's not very consistent and not helping me to find best practice.

What do these choices affect? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @Ringen,

at this point, for traditional moving heads, the geometry selection dot not affect much. It is with multi "level", multi pixel fixtures, where this is part of the elementary structure how the file is built and it is important. Some of our files had historically been done differently and they could contain some previously used structure. Thank you for noticing and reporting, when doing some modifications, we will change the mapping.

Cheers

Petr

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.