Open Source 3DS loader???

[antoinelechacal]

I'm looking for an open-source and complete (as much as posible) 3ds loader that just loads data into memory without any rendering.


Thanks for your help.

[tom]

There is the mri-v3ds lib:
http://www.java-gaming.org/forums/index.php?topic=1863.0

Not open-source though.

[antoinelechacal]

Thanks for your help.

I started my own loader, so far I can load models exported from blender.

I'm facing a problem : blender seems to export the topology (the faces) of my model, I can find in these files the 0x4120 tag but this tag isn't present in regular 3ds files...

The question is simple: how can I get the topology in files exported from 3dsmax?

Thanks

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!

[gouessej]

Did you solve your problem? I'm looking for a good loader for 3DS. I found one but it seems to be incomplete.

[Marvin Fröhlich]

We have a 3ds loader in Xith3D. Tough it is not totally complete. But it may be worth a try. When you finally found a complete loader, I would be interested in it, too.

Marvin

[DzzD]

you will got a complete one when I will finish 3DzzD opensourcing (including keyframer,instance,pivot,localaxis)

[gouessej]

you will got a complete one when I will finish 3DzzD opensourcing (including keyframer,instance,pivot,localaxis)

Ok thanks 

[gouessej]

Hi!

That's fine, my game now contains a loader for 3DS/OBJ/MD3 models. I will update the source code after some tests. 

[cylab]

Unfortunately your code is GPL, so no possibility to use it in a non GPL licenced scenario. Reusable code should imho be at least LGPL and better though BSD licenced. If you have some code to share and some to protect, you could split your app into the application as GPL and support library as LGPL/BSD. Better though is contributing to some utility project like jagatoo (http://sourceforge.net/projects/jagatoo)

[gouessej]

Unfortunately your code is GPL, so no possibility to use it in a non GPL licenced scenario. Reusable code should imho be at least LGPL and better though BSD licenced. If you have some code to share and some to protect, you could split your app into the application as GPL and support library as LGPL/BSD. Better though is contributing to some utility project like jagatoo (http://sourceforge.net/projects/jagatoo)

Unfortunately? It is a provocation. My aim by using the GPL is to share my code and to prevent anyone that uses my code from not sharing it. You show it only as a constraint, it is not fair! You don't talk about my political motivations that justify this choice, you don't talk about the positive aspects of using the GPL. It is only your position and you shouldn't try to discourage people of using my code! I share all my source codes, all my programs (except at work) are under GPL, it is not a contradiction. Therefore, I say NO, there isn't a single way to think, it is not evident that I should put my support library into LGPL. Many people agree with you, JOGL is under BSD license for example, JOGG and JORBIS under LGPL but I disagree and using the GPL doesn't mean that I don't want to share my source code!

If some people here wants a 3DS loader under LGPL, they can look at "Easyway" on sourceforge.net: http://easyway.sourceforge.net/joomla/index.php

The aim of this thread is not to start a war about the choice of licence. I like open source programming a lot, I'm against closed source programming, that's my choice, not yours. Then, if you don't want to fully open your source code, don't use my source code at all and don't come here to bother me with your advertising for another project.

Finally, I will never use LGPL for my game, nor for the application, neither for my libraries 

P.S: I precise that some people already reused my source code and I have made some efforts to make it a little bit easier (by adding an ANT script for example). I'm particularly angry as you mean that my choice is not good in order to share my code.

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!

[cylab]

Holy crap 

I was only saying that putting supporting code under a different license gives more freedom of choice for interested developers. And I was saying IMHO - so what's your problem

As you understand, I don't think that the GPL is a good license for sharing. It's just because it has a viral clause that forces you to put your source code under GPL as well. Consider someone  writing an application that he wants to put under BSD (an osi approved open source license!). As soon as he links to a GPLed jar, he can't do that anymore. But he isn't stealing or changing or hiding the code, he is just linking to some unmodified functionality and will distibute the full source, so why should he be forced to use the GPL for his own code?

I think you gave the answer yourself: political motivation - and that IMHO sucks

And regarding the "advertising" for another project, I was just suggesting to think about a collective effort for model loaders - if you aren't interested, it's your personal choice...

Edit: couldn't resist to write some more than just holy crap, like I did in the first place

[gouessej]

Holy crap 

I was only saying that putting supporting code under a different license gives more freedom of choice for interested developers. And I was saying IMHO - so what's your problem

As you understand, I don't think that the GPL is a good license for sharing. It's just because it has a viral clause that forces you to put your source code under GPL as well. Consider someone  writing an application that he wants to put under BSD (an osi approved open source license!). As soon as he links to a GPLed jar, he can't do that anymore. But he isn't stealing or changing or hiding the code, he is just linking to some unmodified functionality and will distibute the full source, so why should he be forced to use the GPL for his own code?

I think you gave the answer yourself: political motivation - and that IMHO sucks

And regarding the "advertising" for another project, I was just suggesting to think about a collective effort for model loaders - if you aren't interested, it's your personal choice...

Edit: couldn't resist to write some more than just holy crap, like I did in the first place

I have tried to find some people to help me on my project and a student might write a software component for it in some months, it is a collective product, it is a result of a collective effort as I asked for help sometimes (many people have helped me mainly for the tests) and I repeat that my source code has been reused. I suggested to add one of my loaders in JOGLUtils (but the creators refused, they said they don't need a MD3 loader), therefore you can't say I'm not interested in collective effort for model loaders!

I chose to restrict a little bit the freedom of all the developers (by the viral clause) in order to prevent anyone from restricting hugely the freedom of all the developers, it is a fair choice on my view, it prevents anyone from improving the library BUT not opening the source code. I think that if you share your code with others, the others should share their source codes too. The GPL is a way of trying to do it.

I'm a free human being, I'm free to defend my ideas. I know that some people here are interested in LGPL libraries to get the "best" of the two worlds:
the collective effort of the open source world and the possibility of using them to make money by selling closed source products. I don't know why it would be a shame to have some political motivations as many people here implicitly speak about politics whereas I told you explicitly that I chose the license to defend my convictions. I hate this lack of transparency.

I like something viral that forces people to share. 

[erikd]

I suggested to add one of my loaders in JOGLUtils (but the creators refused, they said they don't need a MD3 loader), therefore you can't say I'm not interested in collective effort for model loaders!

JOGLUtils is BSD so unless I'm completely misunderstanding the GPL license (please correct me if I do), you have basically offered the JOGLUtils folks to violate the license of your own code, haven't you? 

[gouessej]

JOGLUtils is BSD so unless I'm completely misunderstanding the GPL license (please correct me if I do), you have basically offered the JOGLUtils folks to violate the license of your own code, haven't you? 

Yes you're right. I should program less and sleep more. Good remark, thank you.