search

KhronosGroup / glTF-Sample-Assets

To store all models and other assets related to glTF
255 stars 30 forks source link

Samples for KHR_animation_pointer #106

Open hybridherbst opened 4 months ago

hybridherbst commented 4 months ago

Related:

Fixes #82.

Sample assets for KHR_animation_pointer, ranging from "very simple" to "extensive" and "animated extensions". The assets are the same as in the original PR to the models repository.

lexaknyazev commented 4 months ago

Please add license/copyright info for the used images.

DRx3D commented 4 months ago

Please see errors reported in automated validation checks. Converting to Draft until checks pass.

lexaknyazev commented 4 months ago

@DRx3D Validation errors should be ignored for now as they are caused by a bug in the validator.

echadwick-dgg3d commented 3 months ago

This is a great asset for stress-testing the extension. However I see a few things that need to be fixed before it can be merged:

  1. Readme needs at least one screenshot. See SubmittingModels for guidelines. There should be a a larger version for embedding in the readme, and a smaller version for thumbnail use. An animated GIF might make sense given the context.
  2. The cat texture should be replaced with something you have personally made. A reverse image search shows it may be created by "klimkin" who seems to have an attribution stipulation: https://pixabay.com/photos/cat-hunting-siamese-eyes-close-up-2529563/ and also the Pixabay site has some license limitations: https://pixabay.com/service/license-summary/. Because of these complications I think you should just use a different image.
  3. glTF Validator has a bunch of errors, many are severity 0 and severity 1. Some can be attributed to lack of validator support for KHR_animation_pointer, but others seem be unrelated asset problems. I'm not sure we want an asset in the repo with so many errors? Empty nodes, unused UVs, unused tangents, duplicate animation targets, skinned mesh errors.
hybridherbst commented 3 months ago

Yes, sorry! I want to update the PR, just didn’t get to it yet. I believe the cat asset has a permissive license but I’ll have to include that license of course.

I disagree though on the validator warnings regarding unused tangents and UVs; excluding those breaks interoperability for files as one can’t assign a different material that needs these attributes in another software. There should really be separate validator settings for general use assets and final delivery assets.

echadwick-artist commented 3 months ago

Hmm, I see the point of interop.

This is not part of the core design philosophy for glTF which is to be a final-mile delivery format, not an interchange format. The glTF Validator is designed (partly) for assessing delivery efficiency.

People certainly can and do use glTF for interop, and it does make sense since there are a lot of importers and tools these days.

One of the goals of the asset repo is to be a collection of well-formed assets, and passing the validator is one way to help us get there.

For interoperability assessment, you could perhaps leverage the glTF Asset Auditor. https://www.khronos.org/gltf/gltf-asset-auditor/

hybridherbst commented 3 months ago

I have voiced my opinion on this many times and practical use of glTF confirms that interoperability is a main usecase, independent of whether Khronos holds the „pure distribution format“ stance. Imagine if Blender would exclude attributes when exporting, just so that files are „valid“ — the chaos! Much more often than not these files get imported into some 3D engine and changed further.

Personally I have a number of test files that are „strictly valid“ to demonstrate to others how that breaks everyone’s workflows — happy to contribute these as sample assets if wanted.

Independent of all the above 🙂I hope to get to update the PR in the next two weeks, I’ll see if I can maybe make variants that are production ready vs. make the validator happy.