pouët.net

why does all these responses löook as if i did em ?

i just axxxidantally zthe HOLE pwet !

ppl believing in god believe in what i say: so YES!

Rob: I'm willing to debate my religion with anybody, if only just for the "...but how can you be religious? I thought you were [something totally fucking irrelevant]!" effect only :D

And besides: come on, I'm admining fuckmothering POUET - you HAVE to believe in a God of SOME sorts to be able to do it. :P

And here I thought that pouet bbs is the final truth that there is no god ;)

s/truth/proof

Gargaj: but how can you be religious? I thought you were Hungarian!

rob: self delusion is more common than you'd imagine :)

Rob: He's Hungarian allright, so his religion is probably like their politics - a riot :)

Gloom: at least they have the tasty "culturecrash" ;)

i stand corrected, haha ;)

men would follow women in all their churches, faith and other weird worshipping... without really believing that there's something else good beyond boobs, food and computers.

Gargaj bows only to the god of ROCK \m/ x_x \m/

Rob: Indeed they do, lucky bastards. :) That is one tasty bit of snack.

sorry to dig this one up, but just few of my thoughts.

1. download link is nice - first, you can easily check the actual size of .swf, second - you'll probably get few fps more in standalone flash player than in web browser
2. .swf is a multimedia powerhorse. i'm working with it since flash 3, and then it was nothing more than a platform for designers/artists with a little scripting capability. times are changing, but many people still recognize flash as a 'ah, just click and drag shit', which is true, and at the same time, wrong. you can make stuff with flash IDE, you can code things in notepad as well.

demoscene, at least when it comes to coding, was always dedicated to getting as much from the (hardware) platform as you can get. thinking that flash is 'just another scripting thingy' is 100% wrong.

mov f1.rg, f0.rg
set f0.a, 0.5
mul f1.rg, f0.aa
texb f0.b, f1.rg, t0.r
sub f0.b, f0.a
set f0.a, 48
mul f0.a, f0.b
add f0.rg, f0.aa
texb f2, f0.rg, t1
set f0.a, 4
mul f0.b, f0.a
add f0.b, f2.a
mul f2.rgb, f0.bbb

this is one of the shaders from my last prod in flash. it's compiled by flash player to SSE code. so, it's up to the coder if he decides to push the platform to the limits, or if he decides to do simple 'point and click' shit, just to prove he can make things 10000 bannermakers can do.

so, back to the question... i guess it's about coding.
gfx can be demoscene related.
music can be demoscene related.
even video can be demoscene related.
but when it comes to demos/intros, it HAS TO be coded. of course, many groups are using their own (or not their own) tools to make demos/intros, like werkkzeug, but those things has to be coded as well.

so... if some demo/intro has effects which had to be coded, because those are not possible to do with 'point & click bannermaker technology', and there's a file_id.diz, showing obvious intention from it's maker to do demoscene related stuff, then imho yes, it is demoscene related.

uniCorn: there are some nice things done in flash and as I said, I see no reason why not to add it to pouet as long as its scene-related..
but..
..lets' take your "wet julia" effect as an example..I mean, nice effect and all but it uses 66% CPU time of 4*2.83Ghz cores (lores, 480x300) ..so.. WTF.. I've done a similar effect in ~5% CPU time on the same machine..in a scriptlanguage :/

in a scriptlanguage, but using gpu, right?
keep in mind that flash player does NOT use gpu when it comes to shaders - those are executed on cpu. and in case of 'wet julia', few % of cpu power goes to fractal and waves, all the rest is related to shading and displacement map - background is distorted by waves, and all those calculations are done with floating point math. scriptlanguage, you're saying. either compiled, or with hardware pixel shader support. or you'll get same or worse performance than with that flash thing.

and a sidenote, it's nonsense. so what it uses cpu? so all those .js stuff is worth nothing? it's a platform. before flash player 9, people weren't able to get decent performance with setPixel stuff. now you can do much more than that. it's about people having fun with pushing platform to it's limits, whatever that platform is. that's what demoscene is about, imho. otherwise, it's like saying 'c64 prods are worth nothing because i can has shaders on PC'.

not really using GPU: even worse: I used OpenGL just to blit the framebuffer/texture to the screen, slow as hell I tells ya ! :)

the actual effect is pure sw rendering (but I've to admit that it doesn't look as nice as your one, it's just a "julia attractor" but I guess adding some ripples+displ.mapping probably wouldn't push it to 60%+ :)

the "shader" is compiled to x86, too. in pure interpreted mode it uses ~28% cpu time ;)

well, anyway. that was 7 years ago :D

uniCorn: besides that sidenote, I agree.

yeah that looks real hard brother. *cough*


(hereby not saying that flash isnt a potentially valid platform)

it's just not a 'point & click platform' unless coder wants it to be this way, and in such case it's his problem and he should be shot for calling himself a coder in the first place ;)

ever tried to code in labview?

heh i read 'hebrew'

@unic0rn: how did you do the asm thing? haXe?

Tinic Uro provided shader disassembler/assembler tools on his blog.