W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > September 2012

Re: Perlin and simplex noise

From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2012 13:11:59 -0700
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>, David Sheets <kosmo.zb@gmail.com>, "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
Message-ID: <96D45624-0663-44B4-B3D7-030E6E91A476@adobe.com>

On Sep 3, 2012, at 12:47 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> Actually, what is the problem of copy pasting shaders or use generators?
>>>> I think this is more helpful then introducing yet another filter primitive.
>>>> We already have enough in my eyes. Introducing more makes it harder to
>>>> maintain those - from the spec and the implementor side. I have nothing
>>>> against regular used short hands, but another noise filter does not really
>>>> fit into this concept in my eyes.
>>> The problem is that it's much more difficult to use than a simple
>>> function.
>> If you believe this, maybe we need to fix that.
>> It should be possible to make shaders as easy to use as filters...
> As easy as *filters*, maybe (but probably not).  As easy as the
> *shorthand filter functions*, no, that's impossible.  I was talking
> about the latter.
>>> Noise is used quite a lot in webpages, but right now it's
>>> always done by downloading a noise PNG or whatever.  Making noise
>>> available as a primitive would be very useful!
>> The door was always left open to add more shorthands so if enough people see
>> their value, they should be added.
>> The filtering model in CSS is not as powerful as SVG (ie you can not
>> composite different filters together) so we probably need to add more than
>> just the turbulence filter.
> The type of noise I'm interested in is sufficient as a plain image.
> It would also be useful as a filter function, sure, but I just want to
> add a noise() function to the <image> type, and I'll rely on SVG
> making a good decision about the type of algorithm to do it with.
This is already specified by Filter Effects[1].

[1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FXTF/raw-file/tip/filters/index.html#FilterCSSImageValue

> ~TJ
Received on Monday, 3 September 2012 20:12:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:37 UTC