[HN Gopher] Scratchapixel 4.0, Learn Computer Graphics Programming
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Scratchapixel 4.0, Learn Computer Graphics Programming
        
       Author : magnio
       Score  : 219 points
       Date   : 2024-06-09 05:14 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.scratchapixel.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.scratchapixel.com)
        
       | bun_terminator wrote:
       | I know it probably doesn't relate to the content; but my bs/ai
       | detector sounded the alarm after seeing the abundance of probably
       | midjourney-generated chapter images.
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | Scratchapixel is the real deal but yeah, I know what you're
         | saying. The "house styles" of services like Midjourney are so
         | widely seen in scams and spam that they have become an
         | automatic red flag. Doubly so when the material is supposed to
         | be about non-AI means of creating images - why aren't you
         | showing the actual product of following the course?
        
         | Retr0id wrote:
         | I was also confused by that, it's a weird choice considering
         | the articles themselves are full of original diagrams and
         | illustrations that could easily have been used instead. The AI
         | generated images are just visual noise.
        
         | auggierose wrote:
         | I'd say your bullshit detector needs some readjustment. You can
         | make nice images with AI, especially as chapter images.
        
         | SapThePixelFox wrote:
         | AI-thumbnails will be removed soon.
        
         | prmoustache wrote:
         | I would say generating chapter thumbnail images for a non
         | artistic publication is probably the best use case for AI.
        
           | meindnoch wrote:
           | It isn't, because people associate these kinds of pictures
           | with low-effort auto-generated clickbait and scams.
        
             | ofrzeta wrote:
             | "people" as in "some people on HN"? Because I think as
             | broader audience wouldn't necessarily mind or associate
             | those images with scams.
        
           | bun_terminator wrote:
           | At face value yes, maybe. But low-quality content is
           | increasingly associated with them, so the effective impact
           | can easily get negative. I'd like to compare this to typical
           | startup landing pages or doxygen documentations. Both can be
           | spotted from a mile a way and are strongly correlated with
           | padded and low quality content.
        
       | susam wrote:
       | An interesting excerpt from the section "3D Computer Graphics
       | Primer":
       | 
       |  _> The understanding of light and how we perceive it has evolved
       | significantly over time. Ancient Greek philosophers posited that
       | vision occurred through beams of light emitted from the eyes,
       | interacting with the environment. Contrary to this, the Arab
       | scholar Ibn al-Haytham (c. 965-1039) introduced a groundbreaking
       | theory, explaining that vision results from light rays
       | originating from luminous bodies like the sun, reflecting off
       | objects and into our eyes, thereby forming visual images. This
       | model marked a pivotal shift in the comprehension of light and
       | vision, laying the groundwork for the modern scientific approach
       | to studying light behavior._
       | 
       | Indeed! If you are interested in reading more about this, I
       | recommend the article "Light Through the Ages: Ancient Greece to
       | Maxwell"[1]. It is a very fascinating article written by J J
       | O'Connor and E F Robertson in 2002 that takes us through a
       | journey of how our understanding of light has evolved over the
       | last few millennia.
       | 
       | [1] https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Light_1/
        
         | jagged-chisel wrote:
         | > "...vision occurred through beams of light emitted from the
         | eyes, interacting with the environment"
         | 
         | How did they explain lanterns and torches in this theory?
        
           | penteract wrote:
           | Until you can observe that light doesn't travel
           | instantaneously, it would be consistent to believe that a
           | beam leaves your eyes, bounces off a surface, and informs you
           | (as though it were a limb, perhaps) when it hits a light
           | source.
        
             | jagged-chisel wrote:
             | The more I think about it the weirder it gets.
             | 
             | It's day time, the sun is up, it's a cloudless day. Ambient
             | light is bouncing all over, including into a south facing
             | window (i.e. no direct sunlight.) How does the Eye Light
             | Emitter do its job in this case?
             | 
             | Now, I don't mean "this concept is impossible" because
             | that's clear. I'm genuinely curious how this would have
             | been explained by someone at the time.
        
               | meindnoch wrote:
               | Vision rays emanate from your retina, get refracted by
               | the lens, exit the pupil, go outside the window, get
               | scattered in the air, and - some of them - end up hitting
               | the sun.
        
           | meindnoch wrote:
           | What do you mean lanterns and torches?
           | 
           | On the macroscopic scale, light rays can be replaced with
           | vision rays, and everything works out the same. That's how
           | ray tracing works. People thought eyes were doing ray
           | tracing.
        
             | Keyframe wrote:
             | That's how we still do (simulation of) ray tracing
             | (Whitted).
        
             | _a_a_a_ wrote:
             | What do you think he means? It's a good question.
        
           | HideousKojima wrote:
           | I remember a guy who had a novel theory (mostly as a joke, I
           | think) that light bulbs don't emit light, they simply suck
           | away the darkness. He literally called lightbulbs
           | "darksuckers."
        
           | Phrodo_00 wrote:
           | A far as I know, in raytracing, you bounce your ray from the
           | surface's normal and if it hits a "light source" then it's
           | brighter (by the inverse square distance to the source).
           | Maybe they explained the same way, except they used a
           | different name?
        
             | jagged-chisel wrote:
             | I think this is plausible. I guess they thought unlimited
             | ray bounces were a thing.
        
         | pixelpoet wrote:
         | I can't recommend that maths history site enough, I've read
         | through basically all of it multiple times and sent in many
         | corrections over the years :)
        
       | atan2 wrote:
       | I would personally try to have some non-AI thumbnails. But that's
       | just me.
        
         | SapThePixelFox wrote:
         | )) The AI-thumbnails will be removed in a few weeks. Totally
         | agree with you.
        
           | auggierose wrote:
           | What are you replacing it with?
        
             | otteromkram wrote:
             | ML thumbnails.
        
           | Vegenoid wrote:
           | Just remove the images now, until you have real ones.
           | 
           | I've seen several blogs/sites of decent quality and technical
           | depth start throwing random semi-related generated images
           | into their articles, and it just makes me immediately wary of
           | BS. No images is better than AI-generated ones if you want
           | your site to look like it was made with care and has good
           | information on it.
        
           | ipsum2 wrote:
           | The thumbnails are fine imo.
        
       | meindnoch wrote:
       | Yuck, AI thumbnails.
        
       | nuz wrote:
       | Looks great! I really have to supress my "AI thumbnails means low
       | quality AI slop" sensors though because I've heard of this site
       | before and know it's high quality.
        
       | barrenko wrote:
       | Very similar to drawabox.com in the "feel".
        
       | blondin wrote:
       | Scratchapixel and Rougier's Python OpenGL
       | (https://github.com/rougier/python-opengl) are two books that i
       | want to see completed one day...
        
       | GaggiX wrote:
       | I just noticed that all the thumbnails are AI generated, I think
       | most of them look quite good, only a few need to be replaced in
       | my opinion: "What Do I Need to Get Started?", 8, 25, 26 look
       | pretty bad; I would have chosen the same style as "1." and "2."
       | and used it for all images as they do not have the typical AI
       | look.
        
       | wpwpwpw wrote:
       | amazing
        
       | beemoe wrote:
       | From the getting started section:
       | 
       | > Terminals are part of the MacOS since it is Linux-based.
       | 
       | This is not true. MacOS is based on Unix.
        
         | al_borland wrote:
         | I noticed that too, then it mentioned that compilation should
         | work on macOS and Linux, even though they use Windows. But then
         | they compile to a .exe in the test example to make sure
         | everything is working. This kind of makes it a non-starter for
         | someone who doesn't already have some idea what they're doing.
        
         | meindnoch wrote:
         | >MacOS is based on Unix.
         | 
         | It't not "based on". MacOS is _a_ Unix.
        
       | karpour wrote:
       | Quality writing and sloppy ML-genrated thumbnails really don't
       | fit together, but I saw you already announced that you will
       | replace them with proper images, so this will be a nice resource
       | overall!
        
       | globalnode wrote:
       | have been waiting for the texturing chapter to be done for what
       | feels like years now... i actually think it has been years.
        
       | torginus wrote:
       | Honestly - mixed feelings. This looks more like a way to build up
       | academic/collegiate level knowledge on computer graphics than a
       | way of familiarizing yourself with shaders/rendering techniques.
       | 
       | It is also woefully incomplete.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-06-10 23:01 UTC)