Reason Rack extension

[Richard_Synapse]

It's important to remember REs are now available since one day. It may take a few years before we can really see where it's all going, but I see big potential in it- not to replace anything we have today, but more as an additional environment to get creative.

Richard

[headquest]

It's a concern that stuff like draggable nodes in an EQ or frequency spectrum analysis are not possible using the current Propellerhead technologies, because of this:

The prototypes we showed during Musikmesse were done with an early RE SDK. Neither our dsp code nor our gui worked with the latest SDK that came out some 3 weeks ago.

(explaining why the Uhbik plugs didn't make the launch after all...)

If I understand Propellerhead marketing correctly one of the biggest advantages of RE format is that they will be future proof and backwards compatible. The comment from Urs suggests that in a short period of development change to the SDK a nearly finished RE product can be broken.

Maybe some of you graphics people can comment: adding vectorised graphics to the SDK toolkit would presumably be a big change... right? So to what extent are these initial RE devices going to be backwards compatible and future proof?

[kmonkey]

I don't think you need to worry. Developers will make devices with current possibilities. If there is an upgrade to SDK with new options i really don't see a reason for breaking up old code. I mean how many DAW apps changed drastically over years with ton of new addons and options yet in each of them you can open old stuff.

Regarding Urs stuff yes that's weird but keep in mind that SDK is new and rapidly growing.

[kmonkey]

Also If i can spot one thing regarding GUI and 3dness in Reason - it also seems that Props are forcing developers to use exact same camera angle, shadow angle, lighting angle etc. for their 3d models. Also it seems that there is some consensus of making GUI for reason to look kinda cartoonish (and i don't mean anything bad about it).

If you see fxpansion filter or maybe better example could be Softube plugins. All of their plugins in VST have that nice 3d perspective while in Reason they are all flat. Under flat i mean they have 100% front camera without produced any angle on any side of device, fader or knob at all. Only thing which is making Reason devices as a 3d is bevel and emboss effect and shadows.


Note that i am not whining about anything i actually think it's a good thing to force such things because it could become mess in future. However as some devs noted it some GUI aspects in SDK need to be upgraded.

[Anosou]

It's a concern that stuff like draggable nodes in an EQ or frequency spectrum analysis are not possible using the current Propellerhead technologies, because of this:

The prototypes we showed during Musikmesse were done with an early RE SDK. Neither our dsp code nor our gui worked with the latest SDK that came out some 3 weeks ago.

(explaining why the Uhbik plugs didn't make the launch after all...)

If I understand Propellerhead marketing correctly one of the biggest advantages of RE format is that they will be future proof and backwards compatible. The comment from Urs suggests that in a short period of development change to the SDK a nearly finished RE product can be broken.

Maybe some of you graphics people can comment: adding vectorised graphics to the SDK toolkit would presumably be a big change... right? So to what extent are these initial RE devices going to be backwards compatible and future proof?

This is kind of a different thing as u-he (like many of our early devs) were amazingly helpful and used a non-finished SDK that was still in both alpha and beta. Of course when 1.0 is completely finished this should not be a problem very often (if at all).

The future proofing is a combination of things and it's primarily for the user. The RE code is handled in a way that Reason "creates" the RE by supplying all the interfacing parts and framework. The DSP stays the same throughout. This means with any OS update or similar, as long as Reason gets updated all REs (even ones you buy today) will work.

Re: graphics they're future proof too in a way, rendered from high res 3D models meaning we can up the resolution by quite a lot. This SDK is just hitting v1 and this is just the beginning of a brand new format (!) so some things aren't possible graphically right now but we have a long list of things we'd like to do in the future in many different areas.

Hope that answered some of your questions!

[v1o]

Being 3D models doesn't have anything to do with vectorized UI. What does it help that the models are 3D when they are still converted to non-scalable 2D in the rack? Look at cable guys Curve for instance. Reason just doesn't support that type of UI (yet, hopefully).

Vectors graphics are 3D objects, they are closely related to polygons.

[kmonkey]

Vectors graphics are 3D objects, they are closely related to polygons.

No they are not! Vectors are closely related to polygons only from visual perspective.

Real 3d polygon have it's own place in X,Y,and Z, vector does not! It is simple as that.

[Anosou]

Being 3D models doesn't have anything to do with vectorized UI. What does it help that the models are 3D when they are still converted to non-scalable 2D in the rack? Look at cable guys Curve for instance. Reason just doesn't support that type of UI (yet, hopefully).

Vectors graphics are 3D objects, they are closely related to polygons.

Indeed, 3D models means we can render a 2D bitmap in pretty much any resolution - an advantage of vector graphic too so they share that. It's part of "future proofing" the format but what that actually means for the future of visuals I don't quite know to be honest!

[Robert Randolph]

Being 3D models doesn't have anything to do with vectorized UI. What does it help that the models are 3D when they are still converted to non-scalable 2D in the rack? Look at cable guys Curve for instance. Reason just doesn't support that type of UI (yet, hopefully).

Vectors graphics are 3D objects, they are closely related to polygons.

That's not correct at all

3D objects are often built using primitives, but vector graphics are not 3D. Neither is 'closely related' to polygons, it just happens that polygons are the usual end point of using geometric primitives in a design setting.

[kmonkey]

Being 3D models doesn't have anything to do with vectorized UI. What does it help that the models are 3D when they are still converted to non-scalable 2D in the rack? Look at cable guys Curve for instance. Reason just doesn't support that type of UI (yet, hopefully).

Vectors graphics are 3D objects, they are closely related to polygons.

Indeed, 3D models means we can render a 2D bitmap in pretty much any resolution - an advantage of vector graphic too so they share that. It's part of "future proofing" the format but what that actually means for the future of visuals I don't quite know to be honest!

Guys stop making something to sound as something which isn't. Vector is vector. Yes. You are making your GUI from 3d model. Yes. It's being done by developers for years in VST.

If your GUI's where vectors it only means that they are created in applications such as Adobe illustrator or Corel or something alike. But they are not. They are modeled in 3d application and later they where exported as separate objects (am i right? yes i am )

Stop calling them vectors because they are not vectors.

What does it mean? It only means that if you'll have 25x25m of screen that you can render it in very high resolution (given that you have super hi res textures for that)

[kmonkey]

Being 3D models doesn't have anything to do with vectorized UI. What does it help that the models are 3D when they are still converted to non-scalable 2D in the rack? Look at cable guys Curve for instance. Reason just doesn't support that type of UI (yet, hopefully).

Vectors graphics are 3D objects, they are closely related to polygons.

That's not correct at all

3D objects are often built using primitives, but vector graphics are not 3D. Neither is 'closely related' to polygons, it just happens that polygons are the usual end point of using geometric primitives in a design setting.

Yes that's what i am trying to point out. Vectors can be considered as polygons only from visual perspective (ie when looking at them). I am doing it for years for living and i don't like when someone is mixing these names as something which is in reality far away (in context of GUI).

[whyterabbyt]

Vectors graphics are 3D objects

??

Vector graphics are graphics defined by a mathematical expression. That formula could define something to be drawn in 2D space, or in 3D space. Im not sure how you can state that that intrinsically make them '3D objects.

[v1o]

Hahaha that was fun. No disrespect intended it was fun since i am doing graphic and i do know what is vector and what is a bitmap.

I can tell you that Reason certainly USE 2D "rasterised" graphic (it's not called like that but anyway)!! Just like a lot of other VSTs. It does not support dynamic GUI resizing at least some dev's told that. that's why you have "switches" to expand each reason device.

By "using 3D" they most likely meant to say that they use 3D models which are then exported to 2D bitmap (like anything these days).

Yes ofcourse "use 3D" means use of 3 dimensional models, i.e. the mathematical representations of objects using three-dimensional primitives. Why would it mean anything else?

As requirement all Rack Extension UI's have to be modelled in 3D.

Have a read at this post over at Analog Inustries.
"If a plug-in dev doesn't have someone on staff that has a fairly extensive knowledge of 3D modeling software and how assets from that software are utilized, that plug-in dev is gonna be pretty much out of luck when it comes to Rack Extensions."

http://www.analogindustries.com/blog/en ... 2#comments

[v1o]

Vectors graphics are 3D objects

??

Vector graphics are graphics defined by a mathematical expression.

And so are polygons and nurbs.

That formula could define something to be drawn in 2D space, or in 3D space. Im not sure how you can state that that intrinsically make them '3D objects.

Because on modern computers at runtime all vectors graphics are rendered as triangles (polygons) before being sent to display by the GPU.

[v1o]

Being 3D models doesn't have anything to do with vectorized UI. What does it help that the models are 3D when they are still converted to non-scalable 2D in the rack? Look at cable guys Curve for instance. Reason just doesn't support that type of UI (yet, hopefully).

Vectors graphics are 3D objects, they are closely related to polygons.

Indeed, 3D models means we can render a 2D bitmap in pretty much any resolution - an advantage of vector graphic too so they share that. It's part of "future proofing" the format but what that actually means for the future of visuals I don't quite know to be honest!

Thank you for confirming this for everybody!!