Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way
Home Forums Rules Articles Store Gallery Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 29th March 2008, 12:10 AM   #1551
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally posted by sploo
[B]It's been a few years since I really got involved in rendering work (my last real coding work was in the late 90s) but there is (or at least was) a huge difference between the way gaming rendering and raytracing works.

The gaming systems used z-buffer technology, with shadows approximated using z-buffer based shadows, and no way to do refraction.

Raytracing is much more complex; tracing the vectors of light through a scene, and taking into account complex diffusion, reflection and refraction.

I last worked on this stuff when diffuse reflection was just being approximated by radiosity (at least in the popular rendering field). I'd guess the methods being used today are way more complex!

As for waiting for long renders... a 486DX2/66 I had in the mid 90s took over a week to render a 640x480 image with loads of glass objects!
Its come a long way since the late nineties.

Take a look at this comparison:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/31023.html?type=wmv

Its HD clip of a comparison between the Sony Bravia Ad and a remake using the CryEngine 2 running in real time.

Another one showing some more effects from the same game engine:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/30967.html?type=wmv

I think 8 hours for a single frame vs. 2 million from the game engine is reasonable compared to that.

I understand that rendering is about the correct approach and exploits the mathematically perfect representation of light, however complex, as completely and as accurately as possible. And realtime 3d is all about tricks and optimisations to achieve decent frame rates and still make it look good.
I just think the gap between photo realistic and realtime 3d has closed to a point where I can say that 8 hours is a slap in the face for not exactly night and day results.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th March 2008, 08:40 PM   #1552
sploo is offline sploo  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
I've seen a few vids of Crysis, and the associated tools, and it does indeed look very impressive.

The Bravia copy is excellent. Not just for the visuals, but the physics engine (which I think is one of the best advancements of modern games).

Ironically, I think they're still mainly using z-buffers (plus some voxel stuff) on Crysis, so some things don't change, but hey, if it works!

Your point about the gap between high speed gaming imagery and renders is well made though. A lengthly render is still better, but the amount of visual affects the modern GPUs can do in realtime is staggering.

I remember using 3D Studio (not Max! DOS based!) in the mid 90s. Its renderer wasn't a raytracer, and if I remember correctly, was basically doing what todays gfx cards are doing in realtime (and not as good either)!

Having said that, as my home PC was last specced to play Half-Life 2, I suspect it'd take 8 hours to produce a frame in Crysis .
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2008, 04:29 AM   #1553
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Utah
Regarding the 3 and 5 axis machining I have a couple of comments. And I know a little about cam applications and have worked in a machine shop.

OK, the 3 axis method would be easier to program in software but would take a longer machining time and leave little scallops on the surface which would need to be worked out by hand unless you took a long time to machine it. The cost of having it done would be more than the entire speaker project so unless you have a buddy that has access to these machines that he can use the hand method is the best bet.

A 5 axis machine is a lot harder to program and some can be programmed at the machine like Mazak's. But only someone very good could do it fast. As in a few hours.

Interpolating in multiple planes simultaneously cannot usually be programmed at the machine and reguires cam software like MasterCam to do. It would take someone really good with the software an hour or two to set up. Wood can be cut at high feed rates compared to metal so the time would not be that bad for 3 axis. Still the cost would be high to pay to have it done. I estimate at least 3000-5000 USD to have it done.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2008, 06:06 AM   #1554
ScottG is offline ScottG  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: US
http://toolmonger.com/2007/07/31/too...a-5-axis-mill/

..it has a certain mezmerising quality.
__________________
perspective is everything
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2008, 05:36 PM   #1555
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Utah
The above movie shows how cool those five axis machines are. And there are others ones even cooler than that one. However, just to bring everyone down to reality, there needs to be some input here. That process is not cost effective for anything except one-off prototypes on which tens of thousands of dollars are spent. Even the big car manufacturers do not use those methods for making engine blocks for several reasons.

Programming that engine block would take a week or weeks depending on the skill and experience of the programmer. This would drive the cost very high not to mention the fact that most machine shops would not even consider doing wood on a machine that was not dedicated to that purpose because it will damage the machine. The sawdust gets into the coolant areas and creates a mush that will require the whole machine to be cleaned out.

It doesn't even make sense to approach a DIY speaker project in this way as you could build up a fiberglass/carbon fiber/epoxy cabinet by hand for less money than it would take to get the MDF machined. And you would have a far superior speaker cabinet.

However, if you were to do it CNC this is the kind of machine you would want since the machine capacity needs to be designed for the size of components that you are working on.

Here is a 5 axis router with a 4 x 8 foot bed. This used machine is selling for 50,000 USD.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 8696_2039.jpg (51.5 KB, 1257 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2008, 09:42 PM   #1556
sploo is offline sploo  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Hi Hezz,

Yea, as you point out - it can be done with a 3 axis machine, but it's a compromise between speed and quality (or rather, how much time the machine spends cutting vs how much time you spend cleaning the part up).

I've never actually cut any textured stuff (carving, sloping faces etc.) with my machine, as it takes ages, usually creates even more dust than 2d jobs, and I try to keep the machine's running time down as I couldn't afford to replace it if it broke!
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2008, 09:59 PM   #1557
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Bah, CNC is for weak(and rich!)
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2008, 06:24 PM   #1558
sploo is offline sploo  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Actually, you need to be very strong to hold down a sheet of MDF, when the servo motors and router (with upcut spiral bit) consipre together to rip the sheet from the table and drag it .

Oh yea, and you're certainly not rich once you've bought one .
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2008, 06:05 PM   #1559
DaveM is offline DaveM  United States
diyAudio Member
 
DaveM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vermont
Check out this rendering. Thought you would like it. This is a solidworks photoworks render.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg pw 25 pk lg.jpg (56.6 KB, 1085 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2008, 12:07 AM   #1560
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally posted by DaveM
Check out this rendering. Thought you would like it. This is a solidworks photoworks render.
Excellent work Dave.

I notice the F16 Falcon in that shot. I'm more of jet fighter guy than an attack chopper guy. Any chance you could do another render of the F16?

What's the jet above BTW? Tornado, F22 or something?
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:41 AM.

Page generated in 0.12349 seconds (80.42% PHP - 19.58% MySQL) with 11 queries

Copyright ©1999-2012 diyAudio