Wow! Sounds exciting. I was trying to create a Swing to jpct binder to create "3D" uis, but for some reason I couldn't get the texture quality fast or good enough. Maybe I'll be able to use this project when you put it out. That movie applet you posted was amazing: it was so fast.

--Edit--Wow again. Amazingly fast.

I thought about getting one, but wow after checking the price. Yikes! They are expensive; too expensive for a freshman college dude like me.

Cool! No lag at all on my machine. Probably useful to use for grass effects.

I have though a question about the texture width*height limits. I would probably have run into this problem in the future, so I'll clear myself up now. You said 8192*256 won't work. It says in the docs "Supported texture sizes are 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096 and 8192 pixels in width with any height." Is 8192 height and 256 the width?

What other tools or software do I need?

I would suggest checking out Blender www.blender.org . It has a bit of a learning curve (at least for me it does), but it is very powerful. What I will be using it for is making my models, and painting textures onto them. Also, with the recent release of v 2.49, painting onto textures now uses GLSL, so it is now perfect for painting textures onto models. I am actually really psyched about this.

Also, I think people use Gimp for creating textures as well.

Quote from: JavaMan on June 03, 2009, 02:38:34 pm

Is there some way to find out how much "power" each card has? Like I have know idea that difference between varying Geforce cards. I suppose the older ones are weaker compared to the new cards.

Yes...older is usually slower than newer when you stay in the same range (i.e. low-end, mid-range, high-end). Higher numbers are faster than lower (most of the time...). As a rule of thumb, performance doubles from generation to generation (ignoring refresh designs like 4870->4890 and similar).

It's hard to tell from the numbers what to expect and it depends on your personal view of things. To me, as a hardware freak, everything below upper mid-range isn't even worth looking at in terms of performance, but that doesn't mean that you can't play Robombs for example on an Intel onboard chipset.

IIRC, you posted in the Javagaming.org-thread that you have a GF4MX...it doesn't get much lower than this. The GF4MX is nothing more than a slightly improved GF2. It doesn't even offer shaders and has 2 texture stages only. If you design your game to run fine on that card, it will run on anything.

Ok, thanks for the info. I'll take another look with this in mind. It's nice you provide so much help to people on your forums, especially ones who haven't contributed anything big yet(as in ME).

On that GF4MX, I'm glad that is the bottom of pit as in what people have. The graphical power of that pc is pretty bad, especially since the pc only has 512MB of RAM  .

Thanks! I'll have a look at them later.

Thanks slenkar. What do you mean by

fill the screen multiple times with textures

? I'm confused.

Hey all,
I am thinking about developing an applet for my church website, and using 3D graphics(jpct) in it. People that access this website, though aren't necessarily gamers, and therefore don't necessarily have high-end graphics equipment. So, has there ever been a "survey" to find out how much graphical power the average web visitor has? Or, maybe is there some site that does this periodically?
I want the applet to look good, but I don't want to put so much in that most people won't be able to run it.
Anybody know where this info may be available?
Thanks
Jman.