I’ve just inserted the 0’s at the end of the slider defs as jms indicated and knock me down with a feather, it works in 2.28a a treat. Thanks jms.
Now how about using the 2.28a open file window.
Great work ripsting.
Trev, I’m happy for you it works.
But I didn’t understood what jms tried to tell us : adding a 0 where??
in the script ? in th GUI at the end of the numeric manual input value?
please enlight me 
In Fiber2GUI.py, you’ll see some lines like:
sldDensity = Slider("Density ", 2, 30, 380, 351, 18, sldDensity.val, 0.0, txtDensity.val)
Add a “, 0” without the quotes before the closing parenthesis lie:
sldDensity = Slider("Density ", 2, 30, 380, 351, 18, sldDensity.val, 0.0, txtDensity.val, 0)
Worked for me, :D.
Le détail de la procédure se trouve sur le groupe 3D.Blender,
en français (ça devrait faciliter la compréhension):
Interesting! I’ll be able to solve the slider errors now, thanks! So things I’ll work on today:
- GUI Compatability with 2.28 (jms)
- Compatability with Linux (zaz)
- Fileopen window in 2.28 (trevs)
Sweet! Thanks to jms for the fix and garbager for teh explaination
dante
The changes mentioned above have been implimented. I also discovered the 2.28 progress bar which is very useful. Is there a progress bar in 2.23 under a different name maybe?
Go to the first post in this thread to download the latest version.
Future features I’m planning on implimenting:- fiber coloring with automatic Vcol painting (suggested by ilac)
- green vertex paint on base mesh to modify clumpiness when using fiber guides
I’d like to hear some more ideas about features you’d like to see implimented. And don’t forget about the donation button on my download page 
WOW
Ok I REALLY have to reccommend AGAINST using 2.28!!!
In 2.23 the ponytail example finished in 48 seconds.
In 2.28 the same example took almost 10 minutes!!!
I believe this has something to do with Blender continually updating it’s windows (including the wasted anti-aliasing on the text).
In 2.23, if you bring another application up over top of Blender and then minimize it, Blender would not redraw and you’d be left with a white window. In 2.28, Blender automatically refreshes. However, I don’t think it’s work the 12.5x increase in computation time!
Similarly, after the example has been created, 2.23 has a refresh time of 64ms while 2.28 has a refresh of 614ms. Someone should revert it back to the OLD blender code!
I do not see the difference on my p600/win98… quite 1 minutes 50 on B228
and B223.
(Blender loaded over ZoneAlarm, wanadoo ADSL inteface and mozilla)
I don’t understand… I just made sure I’m not using Dynoise.py too.
Maybe it’s because I’m using windows 2K. I’ll try Windows XP when I get home. Anyone else want to test to see if there’s an outrageous difference between 2.23 and 2.28a?
In fact : 1 minute 50 seconds… but with the original fiber 2.0
I suspect it might be the progress bar. Ripsting’s 228 version uses the progress bar and it is very slow doing the ponytail compared to 223. But I modified his earlier script by adding 0’s to the sliders and that script ran fast like 223.
Paradox
Ok so I removed all the progressbar code and it worked at the same speed as 2.23…
Updating the progressbar definitly does take time (more than it should I think), but I was only updating it once for every base-mesh-face.
And alright, I simply removed the code that updated the progress bar, but left the import code in, and it was going to take 10 minutes. So simply importing the window.progressbar slows it down. How strange! Needless to say, I’m scrapping this feature.
uhm… I suggested UV mapping not Vcol painting (at least regarding Fiber 2)! Me confused! :-?
But 2.28 is the only blender that runs nice for OSX users… Please help…
We can use 2.23 but it is slow and renders slow and has lots of bugs
[quote=“ilac”]
uhm… I suggested UV mapping not Vcol painting (at least regarding Fiber 2)! Me confused! :-?[/quote]
Hmm I thought you mean vertex painting… I was thinking I could color each hair individually to give it some variation… Tell me more about what you mean by using UV mapping? I think that would be hard, even at creation time, to make an unwrapped texture map.
THis is how I see it working:
Imagine one fiber. Its UVmap in the UV window would show up as a straight and flattened out fiber. Would that be a problem?
All other fibers should have exactly the same UVmap, ie when you press F for a clump of fibers, in the UVmap you would still only see one straight and flattened out Fiber becasue they would all be overlapping perfectly.
That is ‘basically’ all we would need. Don’t know how difficult it is in terms of coding, whether the map would be generated along with the mesh, or only generated for one fiber and then copied to all the other fibers after etc? But every fiber should have the same UVmap.
Once you have this simple UVmap it is still easy to create a lot of variation, whether for Grass strands or for hair, becuase you would make use of different Materials with different textures which are using the UV option for mapping. This would allow the use of alpha for hair stands (so less mesh density), bump mapping on grass, insects on some strands, etc. All you need to do is enter edit mode and use L to select various strands and assign a new material to them, and apply different textures for the new material!
I really wish this was possible! Think of all the added details that could be done by means of textures! !!! :o
possible? :-?
Here are my notes:
Fiber2.01 with the only dynoise.so for Linux (no dynoise.py)
Layer 2 (with PonyTail.fib)
Linux (Debian Sid) Athlon XP 1,7G GForce2 512RAM
2.23: 50 sec
2.28: 2 min and 1 sec
2.28a: 9 min and 42 sec
There are big differences between 2.28 and 2.28a!
ponytail - 190 sec (3min 10 sec)
228a, 98lite, dynoise, piton223
[ on my brave webby veteran with celeron 333 and matrox G200 with openGl 1.13 ]
:: impressed ?
I can get it working on 2.28a, but it is v slow.
But it isnt working for me in 2.23
it brings up this error:
Import error: cannot import name Run Fiber
this is from line 41
windows xp
celeron 2gHz
blender 2.23
python 2.2