Linux.com

Feature

Unveiling the Art of Illusion

By Nathan Willis on May 24, 2007 (8:00:00 AM)

Share    Print    Comments   

Blender gets the lion's share of press among free 3-D modeling applications, but it is not the only player in the field. Art of Illusion (AOI) is a mature, GPL-licensed 3-D modeler with robust editing, animation, and rendering features, and it's a lot easier to use than Blender. If you haven't tried it, it's time you took a look at this recent SourceForge.net Product of the Month.

AOI requires a Java 1.4 (or newer) runtime environment, and the project recommends that you install Sun's Java Media Framework for optional support of additional animation formats. It can also use OpenGL rendering if your system supports it. The download page links to Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows builds, plus a platform-neutral package that should run on other flavors of Unix.

The latest Linux package is version 2.4.1, and weighs in at 7.4MB. Contained within is a .jar package and an installer script. You can install AOI anywhere on your system, including in your home directory -- a nice option for when you are testing it out initially. The installer creates KDE and GNOME menu entries in the form of .desktop files, and places a launcher shortcut on your desktop. It also creates an uninstaller in an appropriately-named subdirectory of the installation location.

Launch AOI and you will find another nicety under the Tools -> Scripts and Plugins Manager menu item: a GUI front end through which you can check for and install updates to AOI, and search for and install plugins and user-created scripts. Generally speaking, plugins bring new functionality to the app, while scripts automate functions already present. The line are blurry in AOI's context, though, as some scripts implement entirely new tools and object types.

Main features

So what exactly can AOI do? Here's a quick rundown (caution: list may be heavy on terminology). It can model objects with geometric, spline-based, and triangular-mesh-based definitions, and manipulate them with scripted behavior, boolean operations, skins, extrusion, and lathe turning. It can use image-mapped, procedural, and UV coordinate textures, procedural materials, and point, directional, and spot lighting.

aoi screenshot
Art of Illusion. Click to enlarge.

It can animate with keyframing, forward and inverse kinematics, skeletons, and animated textures. Finally, it can render with multiple cameras, using raster or raytracing, and apply filter effects, depth-of-field, antialiasing, caustics, subsurface scattering, and multiple global illumination algorithms.

Admittedly, the less experience you have with 3-D editing, the less that list will mean to you. Fortunately, the AOI Web site features a complete manual and an impressive set of tutorials to help you get up to speed. Such documentation is a high-priority feature for work and "production" apps; considerably more so than for media players and Internet tools.

The AOI manual strikes a good balance between explaining the nomenclature and exposing how to make use of it in the app. Few people will need the distinction between cylinders and cubes explained. But ample illustrations do help when explaining the difference between ambient occlusion and photon mapping. The AOI manual not only introduces both, it demonstrates them and shows the effects of the various parameters tunable within the app.

The tutorials will also prove useful to first-time AOI users. Some of the basic tutorials are several years old, but the app's interface has not changed enough to make them outdated. In most cases, the only differences are the addition of more options or parameters in features like texture and material creation.

Competition is good

Blender has several editing features that AOI does not, such as 3-D and vertex painting, softbody and fluid simulation, and NURBS. But don't be fooled into thinking that it's a one-sided battle. Take a look at CGSocietycomparison of 3-D modelers and you'll see that the two open source programs rank about the same in most categories. Both are a few features behind heavy-hitting (and expensive) proprietary packages like 3ds Max and Houdini, but they hold their own.

AOI beats Blender hands-down on the interface front. Despite improvements in recent versions, Blender still has a long way to go here. Since it is a Java app, AOI may not natively look as slick, but its object manipulation, texture, and materials tools demonstrate that features and usability are not mutually exclusive.

For example, all commands are accessible from the menus, which helps immensely when you don't remember a shortcut. The main window is always used for scene and object editing; when needed, complex but secondary tasks like procedural texture editing come up in their own windows, thus keeping the main interface uncluttered. The buttons, labels, menus, and text boxes are all standardized, meaning you don't have to guess whether a field is an editable parameter or an uneditable label.

You can get started quickly with Art of Illusion, even if you have no experience with 3-D modeling. AOI is not as simple as Google SketchUp, but it comes close on the basic construction and object manipulation fronts. More importantly, you are not limited to basic construction: powerful features are at your fingertip, on par with the best of the open source 3-D applications.

Share    Print    Comments   

Comments

on Unveiling the Art of Illusion

Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.

comparison

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 24, 2007 07:04 PM
First, I'd say AOI has 51 "No"s in that table and Blender has 19. Doesn't mean much, but it does mean something. Second, you say AOI is far ahead from the GUI point of view, which is not something I'd agree upon, and I don't think I'm alone with this. Point is, AOI is _very_ nice for a beginner, because it's not scary and finding everything is probably easier. But when talking about features and long time usage, I don't think it beats Blender.

That said, I do not want to fight over which is better, because I think it would be a very pointless fight. I'm glad we have both, and I'm glad they are good in what they do. We all are the ones that benefit from their existence, so all I can say is good job, and keep going on with it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)

#

Re:comparison

Posted by: Nathan Willis on May 24, 2007 10:57 PM
Well, I don't think that I said it beats Blender on features. Also, for the record, I'd just like to mention that the reason that I did not count yesses-and-nos from the CGsociety table is that not all of the yes/no columns are of equivalent weight.

For instance, under the physics section, cloth, smoke, flame, and fluid simulation are all separate features, as they should be -- but under workable polygon limit, the numbers are progressive (ie, if you max out at 100,000, you get multiple "no"s, one for each higher number column, even though they are all measuring the same thing).

Which is not to suggest in any way that the comparison table is inaccurate or bad, just that it doesn't reduce to simple scores.

Nate

#

Important installation note

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 25, 2007 09:05 PM
Don't run the installer as root.

#

Wikipedia article has more details

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 25, 2007 09:06 PM
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_of_illusion" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_of_illusion</a wikipedia.org>

#

Re:Wikipedia article has more details

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 28, 2007 06:36 AM
"Beside that: Why are the user of the free highend app blender so pi**ed, when somebody mentions a good - and also free and opensource - competitor?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)"

I think posters are just requesting that the reviewer not post blatantly false statements. In most aspects AOI is far behind Blender (any sort of simulation tool; uv mapping; modeling - (sculpt, nurbs, metaball, poly modeling - AOIs are fairly rudamentary still); animation tools - rigging, skinning, constraints, deformers, drivers, morph targets - AOI has mostly extremely limited versions of these or lacks them entirely ; modifiers; particle tools). AOI tends to have only the very basics of the features it lists, and is lacking pretty much all of the high end tools.

The '51 vs 19' checks on the chart is one example - ie he claimed they were 'close' when that is obviously not the case.

If the author doesn't wish to get called on the false statements, he can just post true statements about AOI.

#

Re:Wikipedia article has more details

Posted by: Nathan Willis on May 28, 2007 07:20 AM
You seem to have replied to the wrong comment here, but we'll figure out what you really meant.

As to Blender fans' thoughts about how Blender hung the moon, hey, you're entitled to your own opinions about all open source tools. That's the beauty of free software. Like Blender? Enjoy. See the thread above for why the "51 versus 19" data point is misleading.

But the original poster is quite right in saying that vitriol and put-downs of other projects is uncalled-for and it certainly doesn't make anyone more interested in using Blender.

Nate

#

Competition is good

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 26, 2007 01:40 AM
Good article! I´m a user of the software.
You can surely write whole books about it, but the article is very straight.

Beside that: Why are the user of the free highend app blender so pi**ed, when somebody mentions a good - and also free and opensource - competitor?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)

We all need competition to grow, or not?
(And Blender stays in my toolbox, promised and fingers crossed).

Vid

#

Re:comparison

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 26, 2007 02:37 AM
The CGSociety wiki entry is ridiculous - it's primarily used by a few zealous Blender users as a marketing tool (yes, that's you LetterRip). Check out the wiki page history and you'll see that Blender is the only tool on there that people are constantly working to promote.

So much on that page is skewed toward Blender. Plenty of focus on number of polys allowed, but no word on the internal renderer quality? That's odd...but I guess it's OK because you can use all those half-finished external renderers and edit XML all day...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P

#

Re:comparison

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 28, 2007 07:19 AM
Someone mentioned that I was being 'named' here.

The CGSociety wiki entry is ridiculous - it's primarily used by a few zealous Blender users as a marketing tool (yes, that's you LetterRip).


It shows Blender in a good light because Blender is feature rich. I certainly do use it for promotional purposes, just as the author of this article attempted to do so for AOI.


Also most of the areas that show Blender being behind other packages (ie where Blender has a red mark) are those that I added. Ie I specifically added categories that focused on Blenders weaknesses (the painting tools; the lack of smoke and flame simulation for instance). I also suggested on the talk page that comparative ratings be used for different categories so one can accurately gage the relative strengths and weaknesses of packages.

Also it should be noted that the comparison chart was originated by cgsociety, not me.

Check out the wiki page history and you'll see that Blender is the only tool on there that people are constantly working to promote.


Blender is the only package that has been updated with a release since the wiki was originated. This summer after Siggraph I'm sure that updates for other packages will be forthcoming.

So much on that page is skewed toward Blender.


What 'skew' do you see specifically - you are welcome to register at CGTalk, and add comments to the talk page or add more categories on the main page, etc. Of course it is easier to throw mud from anonymity and make unfounded and broad accusations of bias and skew.

Plenty of focus on number of polys allowed, but no word on the internal renderer quality?


The 'poly count' section was added by a cgsociety moderator as I recall. It was a section that was present before any Blender user even visited the wiki - so accusing it of 'Blender bias' is idiotic. As to renderer 'quality' - I've been in discussion with renderer authors to establish such a comparison. The difficulty is a lack of standardized test scenes which would allow for a meaningful comparison.

That's odd...but I guess it's OK because you can use all those half-finished external renderers and edit XML all day...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P


Most professional users of Blender are just fine with the internal renderer (ie the Plumiferos movie is using only the internal renderer), although improvements are always desireable. There are certain specialties that Blenders internal renderer is not the preferred solution of Blender users - ie 'photoreal' work for houses and other structures (although notably this is the case for most 3D packages that external tools are used to render architectural work).

Blenders internal renderer is certainly behind many commercial renderers for global illumination, but its scanline rendering is pretty good and with the recent refactor of the rendering code has a nice architecture and is much more easily extensible.

I certainly welcome a renderer comparison feel free to suggest categories you would like to compare on and good approaches to doing so.

To me your comment sounds like you are someone who is using (or developing) another package and is jealous of Blenders rapid growth and increasing success.

LetterRip

#

Re:comparison

Posted by: Nathan Willis on May 26, 2007 02:50 AM
I don't want to take sides on the particulars of the entry, but the situation you cite, as an example, is an excellent illustration of one the many reasons why wikis are not good for documentation.

Nate

#

Comparison of Art of Illusion and Blender is easy

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 26, 2007 02:53 AM
Blender: Pretty girl who turns everyone off by constantly talking about how good she is

Art of Illusion: Doesn't care what you think, try it out if you like

If Blender.org would just fire their marketing team (lol, they're not proprietary software) and get on with life, maybe they wouldn't make me gag so much.

#

cgsociety comparison

Posted by: Administrator on May 24, 2007 06:16 PM
For those who, like me, might have a hard time finding the comparison mentioned :
<a href="http://wiki.cgsociety.org/index.php/Comparison_of_3d_tools" title="cgsociety.org">http://wiki.cgsociety.org/index.php/Comparison_of<nobr>_<wbr></nobr> 3d_tools</a cgsociety.org>



Thanks for the article, it's great to know that Blender isn't the only good FLOSS player in this field.

#

Good article

Posted by: Administrator on May 26, 2007 03:44 AM
Thanks for the article, Nathan - I think you've done a great job here.



I've used AoI for work & play, and it's a fantastic app. Very straightforward. There's a learning curve, but the manual is tremendously helpful, and the IRC channel (available through Help --> Live Help) usually has a couple people around to offer advice.



I run an Art of Illusion forum here as well:



<a href="http://friendlyskies.net/aoiforum/" title="friendlyskies.net">http://friendlyskies.net/aoiforum/</a friendlyskies.net>



Personal 3D gallery:



<a href="http://www.friendlyskies.net/gallery/3D/index.html" title="friendlyskies.net">http://www.friendlyskies.net/gallery/3D/index.htm<nobr>l<wbr></nobr> </a friendlyskies.net>



The AoI web page is a little old and it shows...but like I said, great software.

#

Unveiling the Art of Illusion

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 88.241.137.203] on January 09, 2008 12:48 PM
Best regards.

<a href="http://www.feramon.com">feromon</a> -
<a href="http://www.zets.net">Directory</a> -
<a href="http://www.by1by.com">directory</a> -
<a href="http://www.shopseks.com/feromon.html">feromon</a> -
<a href="http://www.hepzinde.com/feromon.html">feromon</a> -
<a href="http://www.koz-metik.com/toplist-a11.html">Kozmetik</a> -
<a href="http://www.shopseks.com/toplist.html">Shopseks.com</a> -
<a href="http://www.hepzinde.com/toplist.html">Hepzinde.com</a> -
<a href="http://www.hepzinde.com/penis-buyutucu.html">penis büyütücü</a> -
<a href="http://www.hepzinde.com/penis-buyutucu/penis-buyutucu-1.html">penis büyütücü</a> -
<a href="http://www.hepzinde.com/virility-pills.html">virility pills</a> -
<a href="http://www.hepzinde.com/elektronik-sigara.html">elektronik sigara</a> -
<a href="http://www.shopseks.com/virility-pills.html">virility pills</a> -
<a href="http://www.shopseks.com/penis-buyutucu.html">penis büyütücü</a> -
<a href="http://www.koz-metik.com/buyutuculer-c29.html">penis büyütücüler</a> -
<a href="http://www.koz-metik.com/bayan-fantazi-ic-giyim-c36.html">bayan iç giyim</a> -
<a href="http://www.koz-metik.com/virility-pills-p14.html">virility pills</a> -
<a href="http://www.koz-metik.com/elektronik-sigara-c46.html">elektronik sigara</a>
<a href="http://www.koz-metik.com/feromon-c47.html">feromon</a> -
<a href="http://www.shopseks.com/bayan-fantazi-ic-giyim.html">bayan iç giyim</a> -
<a href="http://www.hepzinde.com/bayan-erotik-ic-giyim-1-2-3.html">bayan iç giyim</a>

#

This story has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.


 
Tableless layout Validate XHTML 1.0 Strict Validate CSS Powered by Xaraya