Recently, Bob Sneidar wrote: > I think we are up against one of the limitations of LiveCode, which is complex > graphics. I am not one who would lobby for support of complex graphics, > because I think the limited resources of the LiveCode development team can be > better put to use elsewhere. Just my humble opinion. I do think however that > complex graphics support is one of the hardest things to implement in any > application. Let's suppose LiveCode gave us this kind of vector graphics > rendering. Why not 3D modeling next? And if that, then how about 3D animation? > I was just remarking to one of my IT people that a certain person we both know > never really gets anything done because they took on too much in the > beginning, and now are strung out trying to do it all. I hope LiveCode > developers do not ever find themselves in this position.
I will counter your argument and say better (not necessarily complex) graphics are in fact needed. One of the most important features needed right away (actually for years now) is sub-pixel positioning of objects. This capability would make for smoother, better looking graphics, better rotation of objects, and potentially better looking text. If sub-pixel positioning was available, manually creating curves point-by-point, even though tedious, would look much better. The current full pixel coordinate system for points is too chunky. While 3D is it's own area of challenge, a LiveCode solution already exists for this -- Franklin3D. Regards, Scott Rossi Creative Director Tactile Media, UX Design _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
