Age Verification
This website contains age-restricted material including nudity and explicit content. By entering, you confirm being at least 18 years old or the age of majority in the jurisdiction you are accessing the website from.
I am 18+ or older - Enter
I am under 18 - Exit
Our parental controls page explains how you can easily block access to this site.

Scorsos mensajes - Pagina 1755

  Forum

TheEmu
Da In Jul 2012
7424 post(s)

Discussions for Scenes for Version 1.2.X Fullscreen Mode here

Tutto su iStripper
July 5, 2015, 5053 risposte
@EverthangForever

In the edit to your previous post you said "I'm wondering if the Complex Functions shader is having difficulty rendering some of the more concentrated iterations."

I assume that you are talking about the result of using the Complex Function shader when using it to distort an image. If so then what you are seeing as "jaggies" are probably due to the finite pixel sizes involved. In principle this could be overcome by using a much higher resolution for the original image - but that is not practical. The problem is exactly that which used to be seen when rescaling any digital image or font, but which is much less often seen nowadays because anti-aliasing techniques are used. It would be a good idea if anti-aliasing were built into the Complex Functions shader, but I do not have it as a high priority on my "to do" list.

Update: What happens when you use a "texture" is that when the shader is determining the colour to use for a particular pixel in the image being generated it determines what point in the texture image corresponds to the pixel in the final image and uses its colour. In general this will not correspond exactly to a pixel in the texture and the actual colour used will be some sort of average over the nearest pixels in the texture. This is done by the GLSL function texture2D.

This works quite well if the texture image is smaller than the image being generated (though a simple minded averaging can lead to a blocky final image) but has problems when the texture image is much larger than the image being generated. In this case two neighbouring pixels in the image being generated may correspond to widely separated pixels in the texture. Because they are widely separated any averaging over neighbouring texture pixels does not help because the two points in the texture are too far away from each other to be neighours.

Strange as it may seem you might actualy get a more smoothly coloured result by using a smaller texture, but of course you then ***** from the lower resolution in those parts of the final image that are not affected by the relative scaling of the generated image and the texture. As I mentioned above probably the best thing to do is to apply an anti-aliasing step to the final image.

Things are, of course, rather more complicated than what I have described, but it gives the gist of the problem.
Corax77
Da In Jan 2008
146 post(s)

Auswahl der Mädchen

Tutto su iStripper
July 4, 2015, 10 risposte
Für mich liegt es ganz klar an den zu krass überschminkten Mädels. Ich habe auch gerade einen Thread dazu aufgemacht, da ich meinen Unmut über einen neuen Makup Trend äußern mußte, der für mich jedes noch so hübsche Mädchen entstellt.

Komisch, daß PapaJango ausgerechnet Melisa anspricht, denn gerade sie ist ein Paradebeispiel dafür (geworden). Sie hätte all die Schminke gar nicht nötig ...auch mit 29 nicht! Und als i-Tüpfelchen dann noch widerlich angemalten Augenbrauen. Das sieht so abartig schlimm aus, ich kanns echt nicht mehr sehen.

WARUM NUR? Warum muß man Brauen noch anmalen? Ich habe noch nie einem Mädel ins Gesicht geblickt und dabei gedacht: "Hey, die hat aber ausdruckslose Augenbrauen. Da müßte sie aber echt mal was dagegen unternehmen!".

Es sieht einfach nur fake aus und total billig. Für mich einer der größten turn offs überhaupt, obwohl es für manch einen sicherlch trivial erscheint. Möglicherweise denkt ihr aber genau so und habt es nur noch nicht damit in Verbindung gebracht.

Das in meinem Thread gepostete Bild von Melisa spricht jedenfalls für sich selbst (und ich war eigentlich immer sehr angetan von ihr!):

fs2.directupload.net/images/user/150704/tmsu69vk.jpg

Total verklumpte Wimpern, dann diese übermalten Brauen und insgesamt sowieso viel zu viel Makeup. Und dann nennen sich die Leute, die sowas verbrechen auch noch "Makeup Artists". *kopfschüttel*

Natürliche Schönheit ist heutzutage offenbar nur noch einen Sch... wert. Traurige Gesellschaft. Wie man wohl merkt, macht mich das sogar richtig wütend, da das einfach nur unnötig und kontraproduktiv ist, aber viele scheinen das einfach nur toll zu finden. Unfassbar.

just my two cents...
Corax77
Da In Jan 2008
146 post(s)

Eybrows disaster at it's best!

Tutto su iStripper
July 4, 2015, 13 risposte
Hey there,

It's awful to see how makeup can ruin a girls facial expression. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against makup, but as the saying is: less is more! Think about it!

Lipsticks, eyeliners, a bit makeup here and there and slightly trimmed brows ...that's OK. BUT: These ***** trend to brush the eyebrows is absolutely sickening! This looks so fake, I can't bear to look. Why in hell are girls or "makeup artists" doing this? I always thought that girls are using makup to beautify herself and not to look like a damn alien! I see beautiful girls in my clique, in town, at facebook and now here on VG, following these disgusting makeup trend.

If you intend in future to deface the beautiful girls here on VG, there will be no cards for me to purchase anymore. I guessed these ugly trend would disappear from the scene real soon but apparently it's the new ideal of beauty. It's a pity!

I was so happy, when I read about Melisas comeback and then I saw this (click to enlarge):

fs2.directupload.net/images/user/150704/tmsu69vk.jpg
http://www.directupload.net/file/u/38518/tmsu69vk_jpg.htm

So that's sexy, huh? I don't think so! The M.I.B. would shoot at her with good reason (no offence!).

And NO, this is not a matter of taste. This is pure self-***** and a hard blow against natural beauty!

Sorry, my english is not the best but I had to talk about it. I hope I don't have so see some of these excellent creations, when I come back to check the next updates on VG.:

fs1.directupload.net/images/user/150704/d9rs4juu.jpg
http://www.directupload.net/file/u/38518/d9rs4juu_jpg.htm

I don't want to make trouble or provoke somebody, but this ugliness has to come to an end!
EverthangForever
Da In Oct 2009
4469 post(s)

Discussions for Scenes for Version 1.2.X Fullscreen Mode here

Tutto su iStripper
July 3, 2015, 5053 risposte
Well that has cleared up a lot of the ***** regarding only passing integer or floating point values from a scn file to a shader. In spite of this, it appears a lot can be predisposed in these switch tables which will allow SCN level ***** of the result via uniforms. Its exactly the outcome I was hoping for, and although its a lot of work to setup in shader, it makes scene construction (tinkering) a pleasure for many for years to come. Great these efforts. They predisposed artistic endeavour..without peeps dissecting shader files into too many tailored versions. I'm combining your work with complex domains in this also and omg thats exciting ..hope I don't fry my GPU lol. Bless you and have good rest @TheEmu... we need time to catch up.😉

Edit: I'm wondering if the Complex Function shader is having difficulty rendering some of the more concentrated iterations. I thought it was just my lousey graphics quality on GetPaint however even @Lunarpup's impecable 1920 x 1200 textures are showing a little saw-toothed where iterations become tightly packed in the rendered shapes. @Number6 mentioned the importance of maintaining pixel size when converting png to jpg some time back. I wonder if textures being png has something to do with the shader's small scale rendering behavior ie: lines tending to become serrated or a series of dots/dashes.?
Edit: think I've fixed it by adding uniform: ContourDensity, int, 10 so I'll update and upload again shortly.
Edit: ok, done !
EverthangForever
Da In Oct 2009
4469 post(s)

Discussions for Scenes for Version 1.2.X Fullscreen Mode here

Tutto su iStripper
July 2, 2015, 5053 risposte
@Mikedreams thanks for your kind comments.@TheEmu really deserves such feedback 😄
@Cherry2000 some great ideas for accessories there ;-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
@anyone
Continuing to try to apply uniforms to give SCN level adjustments to shaders:

in ELECTRICAveNew - TheEmu = Transmats05 - SandboxUnknowne#22678_2 - Random and RandomTextures01 x 12.scn (in above zip)..I have applied ...

framebuffer {
id: Tunnel1
source: TunnelWalls1
shader: fragment, Shaders/Unknown - e#22678.2.fsh
uniform: choiceA, float, var7
uniform: choiceB, float, var5
uniform: choiceC, float, var2

In the ' Unknown - e#22678.2.fsh ' shader I have applied...in the preable:
after uniform float u_Elapsed; // The elapsed time in seconds
uniform vec2 u_WindowSize; // Window dimensions in pixels...
uniform float choiceA;
uniform float choiceB;
uniform float choiceC;
// ..& in the float trap area I've added to defines below..
#define var8 min(length(p.xz), min(length(p.yz), length(p.xy))) - 0.05
#define var1a choiceA
#define var2a choiceB
#define var3a choiceC
// I've changed...
// return min(max(var7, -var5), var2);
// to
return min(max(var1a, -var2a), var3a);

however, I only get a partial rendering of the shader onscreen
(road & just plain flat orange sides) with nothing showing on debug
If I switch the return statement back to original everything (detail) works fine..
(except ofc for debug's mild complaint about orphaned uniforms)
Anyone have any idea why, or can fix the syntax ?