Hi All, Ive seen an example of what im going to ask but I dont know what the term for it is. Basically how do I package up a touch project so that someone can open it on another machine without using touch? I think I once opened a file by Jim Ellis and it was exactly what ive just described. I cant find it now though!
An example of it would be great if anyone knows of one… maybe Jim? : )
thanks
G
Hi Gimmerz,
I can try to help you, but I actually have no idea what you’re talking about in relation to one of my files. What did the file do?
Now back in the day (Touch17 and before), there was three tiers to Touch; the Designer, the Mixer, and the Player.
The Designer was basically a older version of what we use these days when opening TouchDesigner.
The Player and the Mixer were almost the same thing, a way to playback “Touch Synths” created in Touch Designer. Synths being customized animation environments, optimized for performance by eliminating any non-essential construction tools that are not needed to run the animation environment. The Mixer gave you a few more performance options, but the Player was free.
One used to be able to embed the Player into web pages, and anyone with a PC and a decent graphics computer could play Touch synths online.
What we have now to replace Synths are “Components”.
This is similar to Houdini’s “Digital Assets”.
A modular collection of operators packaged together to perform a certain tasks.
Everything in the “Palette Browser” is an example of a component.
Sliders, buttons, color pickers, effects boxes, and full-on performance animation environments such as Mixxa.
Most of these can be wired into each other, and you can also build your own.
That’s the only thing I can think of.
Hope that helps.
Jim
Hey Graeme,
If you right click a component you can export as a .tox file if thats what you mean? You can then drag .tox files into your scene for use later.
I’ll show you on Tuesday if you like.
Cheers,
Rich
hey guys thanks im going to have to look into this a bit further, I simply mean to ask how I can create a file in touch that will open without using touch but still hold all info with regards to buttons and sliders (which will be built into it) so that the user can play around with parameters. Maybe i just dreamt that id seen this done (with your thing Jim) If I get a chance i will have another look for the file I thought did this.
Hope it wasnt a dream… that would be a nightmare!
There currently isn’t a way to run content created in touch without touch. Must have been a dream :/.
You mean a file that opens up in perform mode or whatever it’s called?
bottom line is that, currently, the end user needs to have Touch installed to run touch projects whether .toe or .tox.
you can set up the project to open in perform mode so that the network for editing is not visible. If you have the pro version of Touch, you have the extra option of locking it so that the end user can not acccess the networks for editing at all. (just don’t forget to save an editable version elsewhere first or you’ll be locked out of your own project!)
[url]http://www.derivative.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Perform_Mode[/url]
explains how and where to set all this up.
as long as the project does not use any pro or FTE commercial exclusive features (for example, resolutions higher than normal HD or using shared memory or the clip blender CHOP etc.), it will still run using the free version of Touch.
Rod.
Are there plans to include a “export project as .exe” option like in max/msp and other programs?
will be nice !
I’ll second that. Even though I know that it is not a current functionality, it would be very cool.
Max/msp has had this ability for a long time and makes it a very powerful system.
Many max apps can be turned into fully functional programs you can even see some sold in the apple app store. The incredible power and flexibility of touchdesgner seems locked in. As a software developer, I find this to be a huge shortcoming for the platform compared to just about anything else in its periphery. Think of unity as a platform, the unity splash screen comes up even on standalone apps. Yet you have no obligation to download unity first.
I see touch being an amazing platform for the future VR rush and feel this capability would propel it to a new domain of devolepers. The gaming world seems like a huge untapped market.
I also would be for a simplified export feature!
However I do recognize that derivative has taken strides to make touch player as end user friendly as possible.
One could download touch player and package their touch file with that installer and any other non embedded project files into a .zip
End user still only needs to install one thing, and then double click on the project file I assume to launch?
I believe this is false.
[correct me if I am wrong]
One must first convince the end use to purchase a $300 (or $1,100) touch player license to use the toe you created.
I don’t know about any of you, but I would have trouble convincing any end user to pay this much to try out something I made.
I understand that we are all using touch for extremely niche markets, but in my opinion this price point and limit on sharing projects outside this community is a major disadvantage to the platform. (and a platform that I have spent considerable time learning and hope to continue using)
I would hope that Derivative sees the potential of growing the community by incentivizing other developers from a broader range of industries and markets to monetize their own creations with this platform. I see no reason why any developer interested in selling to an end user would ever use TouchDesigner. That seems to be the incentive of most software developers that make money. I find this unfortunate, because TD is an incredibly powerful platform. (for the record, I do not work for a company that sells software to end users, but I feel my case is not typical of most software developers, and I would like the option)
For example, I like the idea of creating a VR experience that can be enjoyed by a lot of people. (people that are not used to paying $300 for end user software) This seems like an impossibility with the current trajectory of TouchDesigner licensing.
I have been trying to think of any other program that is designed for creation that limits the output so strictly and I can’t think of any. I made a program in Processing and released it on the Android app store, I made applications with MAX/msp and could have sold them on the Mac App store. I understand this conversation has become more about the licensing policy of Derivative, maybe this is the root of the question/answer and reasoning behind not allowing exportation of applications from the platform.
TouchPlayer is free to use for sharing and doesn’t require the end user to register at derivative.ca or create a key of any sort. The free version is limited to the same feature set as Non-Commercial. I know this doesn’t address all your interests, but just thought I’d clarify.
I don’t think we’re ringing the alarm loudly enough. If TouchDesigner doesn’t make a market based platform for buying and selling TouchDeigner-based games or “apps”, Unity and Unreal will take a majority of the growth associated with the entire VR movement starting next month.
This pretty much necessitates the rise of non-commercial’s resolution to match Oculus, Vive, etc. I’m not only saying this because I expect to make a little money in the market. I’m saying this because I don’t want TouchDesigner to get stomped over by Unity and Unreal. Sure, by increasing the resolution, Derivative might lose a few new purchases of Commercial licenses, but think about all the interest and therefore market based revenue that could flow to Derivative during VR and Leap Motion’s growth. I also realize I’m not a business analyst or an employee of Derivative. I just believe that TouchDesigner can be the best, and I’m concerned about its future. Hopefully it’s ok to share those concerns as I have done here.
+1 to David.
I been raising same issue under
the facebook new features poll.
It’s cool to hear this from other people as well.
I think missing out on the VR bandwaggon is a huge problem for the future of Touchdesigner.
Maybe platforms like Adobe and Max [edit: Max/MSP - $9.99/mo, Adobe - $50/mo, Unity - $75/mo, CryEngine - $9/mo, AutoDesk-Stingray - $30/mo] that all use monthly fees instead of a very expensive up front cost, would be a good model to move into the future. I have only the best interest in the future of the TD platform in mind.
now seems like literally the only time to push ahead.
+1 of course, I’ve been trying to move to other platforms exactly because there are only two options with Touch:
1 - get single customers to pay for CUSTOM applications (i.e. museums, theme parks, etc.). at the cost os $1,100 per license (plus hardware) you need to find customers that pay a hefty fee. Not unreasonable, but it’s a particular business model.
2 - use Touch applications as your own tools for performances, concerts, etc. Also another business model.
It would be nice for Derivative to just make the Player free and set up a royalties system like Unreal - which only requires a form to be filled - after a certain amount of sales (it can be lower than Unreal, say $500). They could even differentiate - like Unreal does - between game/end user developers and installation developers. Sell Player to installation developers, i.e. if your app ends up as a public installation or performance, and make it free for end user products like games etc.
This is the bottom line: the massive increase in Pro and Commercial licenses being sold to people developing for TD would more than make up for the idiots trying to use the free Player or not reporting quarterly gross sales to pay royalties.
I call them idiots because no one in their right mind would try and sell a game by setting themselves up for a lawsuit (which they would lose), in case the game is successful and Derivative decides to sue them.
I just don’t understand why they don’t do it. I’ve used TD for so many years and feel endless frustration at having to learn other application development software when I like TD so much…!
well I got a notification there was a reply to this, but couldn’t find it in the link I was sent to. It says my message is the latest one.
But the whole thread reminded me of the unending frustration of talking to so many people interested in using Touch, selling them on how cool it is, then grinding to a halt when the inevitable product distribution questions arise… “eh yes, it’s really a mess now, if you want to play around that’s great, but to sell your work you should use another product”. It’s so aggravating.
Hey Dani, sorry there was a spammer in this thread and I deleted the post.
Sorry we don’t have a simple solution for your product business model at this time. We are making small technical steps towards it with things such as Component Privacy and more options for dongle licensing, as well as other options to reduce licensing costs such as TouchPlayer and volume licensing discounts. Of course you still need at minimum a TouchPlayer license (Non-Commercial or paid) to run the final product, so depending on your needs and product price point it may not make sense at this time.
However, we encourage you and anyone interested in distributing a TouchDesigner product to contact us at Derivative and start a dialog. We can tell you what we can do for you now (within our currently available technology and our resources) and we can better understand what is needed and what will work.
Is there a way to export a simple or readable Touchdesigner project to run remotely on Raspberry Pi’s or similar microcontroller without requiring connection to my PC and Touchplayer application? Some API or otherwise that can be read with a python/C program?
I want to do a series of interactive installations using video/sensor input to animate motors/LEDs and have them run independently of each other and my computer. Individual licenses on each setup would be impractical and potentially cost prohibitive.