| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 513 |
Release id #218343 : E2IRA
User Comment
Submitted by Mojzesh [PM] on 27 July 2022
@wacek Before I left arise (a year ago), the only language on PC you knew at that time was PC Basic. Your poor coding skills and the absence of own demosystem developed solely by arise (it was all spaghetti code) was one of the key points that made me leave your group (among several others). It’s clear to me - especially by judging your answer to this - that you didn’t write the compressor yourself (don’t lie, I know you well enough) … To change my mind, just prove it (there are lots of ways to prove it without the need to reveal the source code).
And do you finally know in 2022 how many CPU cycles are eaten by a given number of sprites, you so-called ‘brilliant coder’?
Ps. You were using the same compressor in the past and you told me so yourself back then you didn’t write it :D |
|
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 513 |
@mojzesh, you greatest skill is not coding, it's your contempt for other human beings. And also, lying whenever it suits you. Too bad there is no CSDb chart for that.
When we were doing ES1RA you could easily say that you don't like the "demosystem" and propose your own or improve it. You didn't. It was ok then, apparently. By the way, the "demosystem" was really some small procedures and few jumps from the main to loader and back. The name was soooo tongue in cheek. Still, you did not complain about the demosystem when the demo won the compo? Strange that.
The COMPRESSOR for the CONVERTED frames (read it with understanding, because I am pretty sure you confused two different tools) was coded by myself. 12 months is a lot of time, I guess.
I am also pretty sure that you are thinking about CSAM. CSAM is an excellent, widely used TOOL, the output of which is converted frames (you don't have to use the internal compression). The converted frames are then compressed by my own compressor. Hope you get it this time. Your logic is like saying you have to write your own Photoshop (Premiere, KickAss) clone to have some gfx (video, code) for your demo, otherwise you need to credit the authors of Photoshop (Premiere, KickAss) in your demo. If you don't understand how TOOLS work or how CREDITS work, that is your problem. Oh, and maybe read CSAM documentation for crediting details. I did. As much as I appreciate Algorhithm's groundbreaking work, there is no credit required, and all the demos on csdb that used CSAM do not feature credits for him.
Also, where were you with this credit talk when I was using CSAM for ES1RA? Another proof you are full of shit.
I never called myself a brilliant coder. On the contrary. Everyone knows I started "real" coding some years ago, and I am a beginner at best. Also, I don't program in the "normal" life. Still, my coding skills might be poor, but together with Luke we kicked your ass. Instead of whining do a better demo, and get higher in the charts. This is how scene works. Put some WORK where your MOUTH is. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11357 |
You could start with making a new entry for the updated release :) |
| |
Mojzesh
Registered: Jul 2006
Posts: 12 |
@wacek Enough of your BS!
Quote:
@mojzesh, your greatest skill is not coding, it's your contempt for other human beings. And also, lying whenever it suits you. Too bad there is no CSDb chart for that.
Hmmm... when arguments are finished, personal attacks start. You showed your contempt for other people last year, on both FB and c64scene.pl, your venom is still there for all to read - yet you dare judge?!.
Quote:
When we were doing ES1RA you could easily say that you don't like the "demosystem" and propose your own or improve it. You didn't. It was ok then, apparently. By the way, the "demosystem" was really some small procedures and few jumps from the main to loader and back. The name was soooo tongue in cheek. Still, you did not complain about the demosystem when the demo won the compo? Strange that.
I told you a few times that your "demosystem" is just a piece of spaghetti code. In the end, apart from linking the demo (because you weren't even able to compile Spindle exe on PC), I was only doing one part. So your circus, your monkeys. And literally that was the case, because we arrived at the second thing which was my disappointment on the entire ES1RA design, the fact that you didn't cooperate with anyone from Arise team, but instead you were just working on your own secretly with Jammer for most part of it. On top of that I'll add that all your animations used in ES1RA are not yours and have been simply stolen from the internet, you great designer. I was super-disappointed on that fact and that's when I started to have big doubts whether joining Arise many years ago was a really good idea, knowing how Wacek deals with any work and cooperation with the rest of the team.
Quote:
The COMPRESSOR for the CONVERTED frames (read it with understanding, because I am pretty sure you confused two different tools) was coded by myself. 12 months is a lot of time, I guess.
You are confusing the terms here. Converter is something that takes one format of image or data and changes it by transforming it to other format (sometimes gaining some data size results) but its main purpose is not a compression. Using converter really sounds like not much of a job has been done by the tool, right? Just data transformation. Easy-peasy.
But it's misleading to call CSAM a CONVERTER, where CSAM is lossy compressor or Quantizer, so you overused the word CONVERTER.
What you probably did here is you took the result of what CSAM output and you fed it into some kind of encoder / decoder which you (maybe) wrote yourself. And again, you overused the word here, by calling your ENCODER a COMPRESSOR. The data has been already compressed by CSAM, you just reorganised it and / or ENCODED it.
This is what happens when non-coders start to explain things they don't understand in the first place.
Quote:
I am also pretty sure that you are thinking about CSAM.
Oh, here we go, you recalled it now. But didn't you just claim one post before that you wrote the entire COMPRESSOR (as you call it) yourself?
So who is lying here? Are you seriously playing dumb?
Quote:
CSAM is an excellent, widely used TOOL,
I don't care how widely it's used, we are discussing the production which tends to be 10/10, isn't it ?
So let's stick to the subject.
Quote:
the output of which is converted frames (you don't have to use the internal compression).
output of which is COMPRESSED frames
The converted frames are then compressed by my own compressor.
By your ENCODER
Quote:
Hope you get it this time.
Keep educating your kids first...
Quote:
Your logic is like saying you have to write your own Photoshop (Premiere, KickAss) clone to have some gfx (video, code) for your demo, otherwise you need to credit the authors of Photoshop (Premiere, KickAss) in your demo.
You should at least mention which tools you used, for someone to assess whether they can compete with you.
Also personally YES, I would write my own compressor, just to have a FULL control over it, and not to be pushed to use any kind of extra & poor workarounds like additional ENCODING / DECODING phases.
But you're simply too weak/not knowledgeable to do that.
Quote:
If you don't understand how TOOLS work or how CREDITS work
Bla bla bla... Take a long, hard look in the mirror.
Quote:
, that is your problem. Oh, and maybe read CSAM documentation for crediting details. I did. As much as I appreciate Algorhithm's groundbreaking work, there is no credit required, and all the demos on csdb that used CSAM do not feature credits for him.
Again, we don't talk about other productions here, but this particular one.
Quote:
Also, where were you with this credit talk when I was using CSAM for ES1RA? Another proof you are full of shit.
Again, personal attack. Is this all you have to say? I complained to you in our private conversations and I had even argued with you about using such animations as IMHO it's totally lame, especially if the animations aren't yours like all anims in ES1RA. I had a mixture of satisfaction of winning and your lameness. Maybe I should have left Arise at that time, I regret that in hindsight. You are extremely ego-centric and very unpleasant to deal with when 'cooperating'. I'm not surprised that most good coders have left Arise.
Quote:
I never called myself a brilliant coder. On the contrary. Everyone knows I started "real" coding some years ago, and I am a beginner at best. Also, I don't program in the "normal" life.
So again, are you good enough to be at the 1st place ? I don't think so.
Quote:
Still, my coding skills might be poor, but together with Luke we kicked your ass.
Buahahahaha, don't you forget that you lost at the MD22 Party?
We won the 1st place and the gold C64 is in my possession, not yours. So who kicked whose asses? xD Frankly, you don't even know what that means.
Also, what would you do without all those people around you who do most of the job yet you then take all the credit for it, AS IF you did it all?
Without Luke you would be nowhere. And afaik Luke also hates you and that's why he left Arise for a while. I'm actually surprised he agreed to come back and cooperate with you again. Poor Luke.
And hopefully soon enough nobody will even remember E2IRA, there are way better productions out there, with REAL code underneath.
Quote:
Instead of whining do a better demo, and get higher in the charts. This is how scene works. Put some WORK where your MOUTH is.
You are not in the position to tell me how I shall live or when & what to release. That's purely mine and my colleagues' business.
Now, to all people who voted 10 for this demo - do you really think that this production should still be called a masterpiece and Wacek a brilliant top-notch programmer ? Take into account that the crucial part of E2IRA was only possible because someone else (Algorithm/Algotech in this case) created a tool for it - otherwise it would NOT be possible. Bear in mind that 90% of the demo is a lossy compressed animation - and that initially wacek said it was only him & Luke who made the demo possible. I hope that by now the curtain has dropped and revealed that the "king" is naked.
@wacek This is my last post about this issue. Please don't expect any more responses. Idz do psychiatry, bo ton tego co wypisujesz wskazuje, ze masz nierowno pod sufitem; zachowujesz sie jak burak z IQ rzodkiewki, a to nawet do ciebie nie jest podobne. |
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 513 |
Nothing to comment. Pot calling the kettle black, accusing of personal attacks which he himself started (and idiotically finished with).
Feeding of this talentless confabulating troll stops here.
You don't deserve my energy.
Bye. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2969 |
Credit where credit is due. This includes tools, especially when so vital to the production.
But do go on!
 |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 659 |
Yeah, if a tool is a big part of a demo, it should get a decent credit. A little startup anim, even, like we did for Sparkle in Memento Mori :-)
(Nb. I’m replying to Krill here for those who didn’t figure it out.. to tie in with the “why are there IRQ loader idents now?” thread from a month or so ago) |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2219 |
Some countenance, please.
Stick to arguments and discussing facts and avoid personal fight in public and watch your language, too.
If this is getting too nasty, it will be closed. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2969 |
Quoting RaistlinYeah, if a tool is a big part of a demo, it should get a decent credit. A little startup anim, even, like we did for Sparkle in Memento Mori :-)
(Nb. I’m replying to Krill here for those who didn’t figure it out.. to tie in with the “why are there IRQ loader idents now?” thread from a month or so ago) Nice try. =)
Anyways, i have it on good authority that there was substantial post-processing/tweaking/re-encoding of CSAM output.
So while an essential tool for the demo, it did not provide a simple automagical press-button-be-done process at all. |
| |
Mojzesh
Registered: Jul 2006
Posts: 12 |
@krill Except for a fact that this demo is trying to cheat viewers by tricking them to think that most of the effects are calculated in realtime (which I must agree it would be a huge achievement if it was true, but unfortunately it is still just an animation). So if you can swallow that, then it’s your business. For me (and I guess other good C64 coders too) a demo was always a way of demonstrating the power of the machine on which it’s running on, and not the power of the machine where it was precalculated. Scene is full of people with very blurred knowledge of assembly language and what is really achievable and what is not. This demo is not an huge achievement as people think it is. (You can precalc much better things on PC, but what’s the point of this?) What should then the proper coders of realtime effects do now, leave the scene? |
| |
Jammer
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 1335 |
@Mojzesh
1. 1MHz is not a lot of horse power so you adjust for it, whatever it takes. Especially C64 is definitely the weakest CPU among all 8bits but makes up for it thanks to brilliant and efficient VIC-II.
2. demo is not only code and coder's splendor ;) IMHO, it's a battle of ideas first of all. Both math and animations are great playfield for ideas. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2969 |
Quoting Mojzesh@krill Except for a fact that this demo is trying to cheat viewers by tricking them to think that most of the effects are calculated in realtime (which I must agree it would be a huge achievement if it was true, but unfortunately it is still just an animation). So if you can swallow that, then it’s your business. That there is at most one degree of freedom (point on the timeline) is pretty obvious from the start, and the animation point is driven home when the TWO disk-change requests appear all too soon. =)
But to me, this demo's strength isn't real-time calculation, but a fresh style of presentation and a catchy soundtrack. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2969 |
Quoting JammerEspecially C64 is definitely the weakest CPU among all 8bits Debatable. C-16/Plus4's CPU runs at 0.88 MHz most of the time, when the raster beam is in the visible area (not in the border), plus there are two badlines in a char row, and no sprites, of course. |
| |
F7sus4
Registered: Apr 2013
Posts: 117 |
The best advice is probably not to sell prefabricated stuff pretending to be hand-made and everyone will be fine. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2969 |
Quoting F7sus4The best advice is probably not to sell prefabricated stuff pretending to be hand-made and everyone will be fine. What are you referring to, specifically? |
| |
F7sus4
Registered: Apr 2013
Posts: 117 |
Quoting MojzeshExcept for a fact that this demo is trying to cheat viewers by tricking them to think that most of the effects are calculated in realtime
I do see where Mojzesh is coming from with this one. It's already an established standard in C64 demos to show off coders' skills with rotating cubes (and bonus effects) as much as how many dots are there rotating on a screen etc.
E2IRA utilizes this trend to show something similar which isn't calculated real-time (not just once, but here quite obviously). Was this part made intentionally to trick the audience? Perhaps. Maybe. We may argue about the motivations, but the controversy is there for a reason. It kinda reminds me of something:
Jodee Berry expected a brand new Toyota after winning a contest, but was presented with a toy Yoda instead.
 |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2969 |
Quoting F7sus4Was this part made intentionally to trick the audience? Perhaps. Maybe. Demos often being stage-magician-like smoke and mirrors isn't new, is it? =)
It's still rather obviously a 1-DOF animation at the core, with some visible quantisation artefacts.
But another tradition of old is including a user mode when you want to leave no doubt about the realtime-ness. =) |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 659 |
People need to calm down re: real-time vs animation. The demo looks great and I voted for it based on that. Yeah, I like code porn, and this doesn’t have as much of it… but it’s still a great demo.
It’s also not a new thing to joke/trick the viewer… Crossbow’s 256 DYCPs, for example, are nothing like a proper 256 DYCP’er code wise - but for what is presented on screen, it’s essentially the same.
The spinning tunnel in Bromance is an animation.
The turn-disk wrapped logo in Memento Mori is an animation.
Etc etc etc…
Honestly, if people need to argue the case of what a good/bad demo is, they’re missing the point. Just relax. Enjoy. Go make a demo about it if you don’t like it. |
| |
F7sus4
Registered: Apr 2013
Posts: 117 |
Quoting KrillIt's still rather obviously a 1-DOF animation at the core, with some visible quantisation artefacts.
The question was whether the 1-DOF animation at the core with some visible quantisation artefacts does pose as a real-time effect or not, and who figured it out at spot.
Design-wise, I do enjoy E2IRA wholeheartedly (and even more than I do enjoy sampled SID music once in a while). |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2969 |
Yes, and "real-time vs animation" is a continuum anyways, with very very few (if any) effects being 100% real-time. It's about how many degrees of freedom there are, really. :) |
| |
Smasher
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 519 |
what mighty Raistlin said.
let's hope someone will never come up with some unnecessary demo-rules, like for cracking:
a demo must contain 30% of pre-calculated animation data max, all people must be credited, scrollers must scroll (uh?), F4CG must always be greeted, etc. bleah. |
| |
F7sus4
Registered: Apr 2013
Posts: 117 |
It's not about rules, it's about common sense. Those who lack it, will argue whether it even exists. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2969 |
Quoting F7sus4and who figured it out at spot. Is that so important? A good show is a good show, regardless of or maybe precisely because so many people fell for it, judging by the first comments. =) |
| |
F7sus4
Registered: Apr 2013
Posts: 117 |
I think the truth is important, so the purpose of the topic is already met. Whoever was/felt tricked, now has a better insight in the matter and may continue enjoying his/her everyday life. ;-) |
| |
Joe
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 226 |
What Krill said! A good show is a good show, basta! |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11357 |
Quote:Except for a fact that this demo is trying to cheat viewers by tricking them to think that most of the effects are calculated in realtime
A Demo using all tricks in the book, pretending to show something that its not?
Say it isnt so. |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3050 |
Quote: What Krill said! A good show is a good show, basta!
What Krill and Joe said. |
| |
DeMOSic
Registered: Aug 2021
Posts: 126 |
Quote: What Krill and Joe said.
What Krill, Joe and CreaMD said. |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 659 |
I would love to know what “real-time” graphics even is ;-)
No sine tables
No colour tables
No textures/pre-drawn pictures?
No pre-canned physics
Etc etc.
From the very first computers through to the very latest, “real-time” is a moving goalpost. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2969 |
Quoting RaistlinI would love to know what “real-time” graphics even is ;-) As i said, it boils down to degrees of freedom in rendering. Look-up tables etc. don't factor in, as long as you can rotate that cube about 3 axes with arbitrary angles. =) |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11357 |
reminds me a lot of the comments we got for Crowd Pleaser (which kindof uses a similar approach). Funny really :) |
| |
Mojzesh
Registered: Jul 2006
Posts: 12 |
@Raistlin
Animations are a pretty repeatable thing - apart from things like cropping and moving them on the screen.
Write code for playing it once, and repeat it everywhere (as Bitbreaker said).
You might occasionally need to correct some of the frames manually for either removing artefacts or for gaining better compression ratio.
Recipe for ANIMATION-BASED demo is simple:
- create something on a PC using either 2D / 3D editor or modern programming language (with high precision floating point numbers, almost infinite memory and CPU power).
- create a set of bitmaps out of it.
- compress animation frames
- use your player (occasionally, change some colors or move clip on the screen, but you’re limited of what you can do here…)
For me, REALTIME effect is an effect which has the following properties:
* it’s CALCULATED and not DEPACKED / DECOMPRESSED while you watch it on every frame of the effect;
* your effect is parametrised, so that you can control it in a way where you can quickly change its property, like: direction of movement, speed, colors, shape etc… you name it;
* good proof of such a parametrisation is using randomness for params, I’m using this technique in some of my effects (find them yourself);
* in most cases this means that the effect has to be rasterised (drawn pixel by pixel or byte by byte) (or you have to sync with VIC to achieve raster tricks, for which (in most cases) you also need to calculate some data every frame);
* most GFX rasterisation algorithms are realised in sequential order following specific and strict (from mathematical or logical point of view) steps, some of those steps are costly for CPU (and any tricks to speed this bit up are fine in my opinion);
* examples of such steps would be as follows (I will use wireframe vectors from E2IRA as an example of what it would require IF IT WAS REALTIME):
* Calculate coordinates of all vertexes in 3D or 2D space (depending on your effect) or get them pre-calculated (I’m still fine with it), in this particular effect this applies to all diagonal lines, all points where diagonal lines meet side edges, positions of flying bits;
* Apply perspective projection on all points (to convert from 3D to 2D space);
* Run elimination of hidden surfaces using either face normal vector method, Z-Buffering (or you can even use cleverly encoded LUT for it);
* then either: Draw lines of all faces on a frame-buffer, draw any other flying objects (whose coordinates and visibility you also calculated or obtained from LUT);
* or: Rasterise it pixel by pixel or byte by byte following any other rasterisation algorithm of your choice (which also consist of a set of sequential operations);
* Clear the frame;
* Start calculating then drawing the next frame;
* At this point the entropy of complexity of your code is high (code is less similar to itself, or less repeated, and more “random”);
* This way you’re proving that you really know what you are doing and how the algorithm is working in details.
IMHO It’s fine to:
* use any kind of lookup tables (LUT) (e.g. Multiply / Division tables, sine/cosine, color tables etc.)
* use single code loop
* use crafted speed code fragments which you either loaded from disk or generated on the fly (even if it fills the entire RAM)
* use DriveCalc
* use pre-calculated positions of some objects on screen
* use textures of all kinds for any texturing effects (or distorters, flexers etc.)
* also it’s fine to use plain frame animations when they are used as animated texture on other objects for example
* use any tricks with VIC since this is already realtime, as you have to sync to the raster line, and do your job while the raster beam goes through the screen.
Also, for anyone concerned:
I know over 20 programming languages and countless of other IT technologies, and daily I use at least a half of them - so please show some respect and don’t even get me started
on what I really know & can code.
ps.
I’m ignoring other ignorants’ comments here, I have no time for senseless divagations. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11357 |
Quote:I know over 20 programming languages and countless of other IT technologies, and daily I use at least a half of them - so please show some respect and don’t even get me started
on what I really know & can code.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
Funny |
| |
Mojzesh
Registered: Jul 2006
Posts: 12 |
Yes, you're right, you're funny @Groepaz
Show us what you know. We will laugh... |
| |
Mojzesh
Registered: Jul 2006
Posts: 12 |
@Groepaz Also I have to admit that your comment was very "substantial"... |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11357 |
I got nothing to prove here. Posing with knowing 20 programming language in a thread where most ppl probably do the same is still funny however. Keep it coming! |
