Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

Farsthary update channel


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

I can't help but wonder. This symmetry you keep talking about on your twitter account.

Do you mean that symmetry actually works now or are you talking about a symmetry copy TOOL?

I really hope its the first and not the latter...

3dioot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Hello Farsthary!

I don't understand what the Tool Options "Refine Steps, Detail, and Smoothing" do. Also, there is "Collision action, Merge action" etc.

When I change these settings, I don't really see how the tool is behaving differently, and if I do see a small change, I don't understand really what is going on. Maybe could you explain what these things do, or could somebody perhaps make a video tutorial showing what these options do?

Thank You!

-Tim Z.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Dunno why this thread is not updated but there is a new video on Raul's blog regarding the symmetry copy tool.

http://farsthary.wordpress.com/2011/10/22/symm-copy-command/

I must say it surprise me greatly that this tool is created before live symmetry is actually fixed for even the most basic brushes like liveclay, reduce and smooth. Hell you can even see the live symmetry mode break in the movie which really made me sad (sym copy.wmv at 0:33).

I also don't understand why you created cap holes. This should be part of the import options for surface sculpting which atm are non existent. Where else would you use this with liveclay sculpting?

Clean mesh. Again a utility tool (why are you focusing on utility tools when the groundwork is still incomplete?). While it is nice an option like sculptris's reduce all which optimizes the mesh smartly would be something I would use a lot more. Since clean mesh gives an even resolution it will wash away any details you have created which for me would undesirable.

The move command. I wanted to withheld my comments on this until it would actually become part of one of the test builds but it's not in the latest build and the blogpost is over a month old so I'm going to comment on it anyway. I feel you are asking for trouble with the current implementation.

I do not want the part that I move to be remeshed. Plain and simple. If you want to know why there is a very simple experiment you can do. Go to voxel mode. Draw a smiley face on a sphere with a very thin brush. Now select the move brush and start tweaking it around. Just move it around every so slightly and do this a few times in a row. You will see all the detail fading out because it get's essentially "resampled" every time you move it around.

The tentacle example you have on your blog is nice. But the move tool will be used just as much if not more to correct proportions on fairly detailed sculpts. I dont want the eye's on my character to fade out just because I wanted to move them slightly higher or lower on the face. Its unacceptable.

As far as the stretching appearing in cases where you aggressively use the move tool to create new volumes as in your tentacle example I refer you to sculptris again. Even for move it creates new topology on the fly. In fact the current liveclay move tool as it is displayed on the blog looks incredibly cheap. Think about it. You still perform a normal move with all the stretching of the mesh that comes with it. The only thing you do is hide this fact afterwards by tesselating and smoothing the mess that is there. This is also why you get a "pop" at the end of the command when the volume gets its final shape.

Performance. Since the movie is sped up this is hard to judge. But if I look at surface to voxels to surface I know this is not instant (try the move tool in voxels which uses a surface to voxel hybrid approach). If this final conversion process gives any lag at all its another argument against this approach. But to me the resampling alone is reason enough to really.

The flatten tool. While I'm am very happy to see a liveclay flatten one thing was immediately obvious to me. Now this is something the normal liveclay brush suffers from also but with flatten its extra appearant. The tesselation proces is much too local. It's very stricly restricted to the brush radius. This gives ugly sparkles anytime you use a small brush on a surface that has a relatively rough resolution.

With flatten it becomes extra obvious because at the border of the area your are flattening you are creating an edge. Its the border between the curved surroundings and the area you just flattened. As you flatten you only use the edges of the brush radius to touch this line so the tesselation proces stops exactly on this border. So the transition area between high res and low res lies exactly on this edge. This gives extremely ugly results and to be honest I'm downright baffled you did not notice this yourself. Its obvious in the movie you posted. So extend the tesselation area a little beyond the brush size. 1.3 times the brush radius perhaps? You could make this a parameter. I think this would do wonders for the liveclay brush as well.

There is more but I'll leave that for another day (and build hopefully).

3dioot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi :)

@3didiot: thanks for your detail comments and I would like to add few things too

I must say it surprise me greatly that this tool is created before live symmetry is actually fixed for even the most basic brushes like liveclay, reduce and smooth. Hell you can even see the live symmetry mode break in the movie which really made me sad (sym copy.wmv at 0:33)

This was intentional, I deliberately break with a currently non-fixed tool the symmetry to show that even in that case the Symm copy command can restore back the symmetry, that's all.

And regarding the Move tool with re-meshing I do not force to use it all the time, like most of the tools I develop they have the CHOICE to keep the old behavior or use the new behavior, I work in a non destructive way -ALWAYS.

and re-sampling as a choice is indeed very good, the move tool is one of the most dangerous in creating stretching polygons and with resampling can be used to quickly shape big volumes, if you just want to adjust proportion, just toggle off re-sample.

Clean mesh. Again a utility tool (why are you focusing on utility tools when the groundwork is still incomplete?)

Because working on the groundwork you realize small improvements that can be made in a matter of days in existing tools that people can start using and not have to wait for the full revamp to be done. Also, in my case, where I join a HUGE pre-existent software, the best way to master it's development is to start from small, external features, toward it's core. Working in that "utility" have granted me an invaluable experience that can be translated in future symmetry core developments, as an artist you may have tool-priorities and I as a developer try to match them the best I can but me as developer have also a development priority that may not overlap yours.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
Also, in my case, where I join a HUGE pre-existent software, the best way to master it's development is to start from small, external features, toward it's core. Working in that "utility" have granted me an invaluable experience that can be translated in future symmetry core developments

I think you said it well Raul, in the above quoted statement. I'm not a programmer but have listens to discussions from them. Your LC code has to be adapted to a pre-existing code base. Andrew's code must be fairly fexible as you have progessed this fast so far. I'm not surprize some things get broken or for right now that brush behavior can change from beta to beta.

Sculptris code only had to get along with itself. You on the other hand have to keep the old and new code from killing each other... :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Farsthary

And regarding the Move tool with re-meshing I do not force to use it all the time, like most of the tools I develop they have the CHOICE to keep the old behavior or use the new behavior, I work in a non destructive way -ALWAYS.

I am baffled by this statement. As you develop liveclay there will be lots of times where you throw away tools because you supersede them. Where you remove options because they are no longer relevant. Where you combine tools because that is more convenient or, vice versa, where you split them because workflow wise this is an improvement. You cannot keep everything you have ever done or created as an option in the long run. Its highly undesirable. The current state of voxel sculpting is an excellent example of that.

Now I'm not saying this is not a good option to have but, with the risk of repeating myself, have you looked at Sculptris closely enough? What does setting the detail slider to zero in sculptris do? It turns of dynamic tessellation so it only works with what is already there. Essentially creating a "traditional" sculpting workflow without the subdivision levels. Is it not interesting how this value has been made extra useful so there is not an EXTRA toggle for turning on/of dynamic tessellation? We've had some private conversation and stuff like this really makes me wonder whether I was clear in what I wanted you to understand. From what you present of your thoughts in this thread I have clearly failed.

and re-sampling as a choice is indeed very good, the move tool is one of the most dangerous in creating stretching polygons and with resampling can be used to quickly shape big volumes, if you just want to adjust proportion, just toggle off re-sample.

You are not understanding what I am telling you. I want the stretched polygons to be taken care of (with big deformations AND with small tweaks). Just not in the way you have it currently implemented. With this statement you act like there are only two options. 1) Do nothing about it and be left with stretched polygons or 2) Tessellate and smooth it AFTER the deformation has taken place. You know these aren't the only two options. The move tool is much to important too keep as simplistic and primitive as you have currently made it. Open Sculptris and use the move tool (its called grab) with wireframe turned on (W). It combines the best of both worlds and you will not lose your detail. Use it for inspiration. I also talk about finetuned tools vs options in the piece I send you; this is a perfect example.

Because working on the groundwork you realize small improvements that can be made in a matter of days in existing tools that people can start using and not have to wait for the full revamp to be done.

Don't spend too much time flirting at the edges; its not what 3d-coat needs nor its users. The things I try to point out are things that will matter in the long run. Nobody will care about a symmetry copy tool if the live copy version remains as shady as it is and you need to constantly use symmetry copy to "fix" what is broken in the core of 3d-coat.

as an artist you may have tool-priorities and I as a developer try to match them the best I can but me as developer have also a development priority that may not overlap yours.

I am aware of that and I realize coding is not magic but hard work requiring pre investments in stuff which is not always obvious to the end user. However this wont keep me from giving my feedback.

I hope this clarifies some of my points and is useful to you. If not, I at least tried. :)

@beatkitano

I consider Raul a profesional. At the start of this thread he asks for feedback even pointing out the necessity of it. I expect him to be able to interpret the feedback he is given and realize it is not personal but part of his job. I guess I hold him in higher regard then you do if you think he is incapable of doing so. My time is limited so I don't have time to sugarcoat everything. I like to be clear and direct so my arguments get across. If, in the end, Raul decides they are invalid or low priority so be it. At least I've made the effort.

I disagree strongly with move+livecaly being a bad idea

I hope my reply to Raul clarifies what I meant. It not I suggest you to read my original reply again. It is not my desire to keep stuck with stretched polygons. I am merely pointing out there are much better solutions to avoid these stretched polygons and that the current approach is a disaster when you have to do small tweaks.

Kind regards,

3dioot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

You have some good points but remember though unlike the other popular 3d programs that 3DC gets compared to there is just 2 developers working on the project and just Raul working on LiveClay as far as i know. Also i get a lot of people like Sculptris but if that is what people want and they need those tools now why not just use that program for now until LiveClay has developed more and is not beta. With some adjustments LiveClay will be much better than Sculptris however and maybe even the big competition like ZB, Raul is doing some great work here in my opinion.

With the move tool i would say it's too early for me to comment but i think multiple modes is good and i see nothing wrong with keeping the legacy version available for now. After all if later down the line everyone agrees there is no use for a certain mode/tool then it could simply be removed but while in beta it's fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@3dioot

I am baffled by this statement. As you develop liveclay there will be lots of times where you throw away tools because you supersede them. Where you remove options because they are no longer relevant. Where you combine tools because that is more convenient or, vice versa, where you split them because workflow wise this is an improvement. You cannot keep everything you have ever done or created as an option in the long run. Its highly undesirable. The current state of voxel sculpting is an excellent example of that.

You take my previous sentence too literally, of course you have summarized what happens in the development of new tools but functionality-wise I never remove a tried-and-true good old feature for a new one, even when the new one use-cases completely overlap the old one, so don't fear the old Move behavior will be lost, in this case you should have wait for the tool to be out to emit your personal review of it.

I try my best to understand your point but now the baffled is me, Sculptris Grab tool is not the same as the MOVE tool, it may seems so but internally is more similar to the Snake tool which by the way, can get the same results (play a bit with the settings) and our current Snake implementation have some great advances there (wait for a new update) So you may be looking for the same behavior into our Move tool, you won't find it there, look into Snake for that ;) so this statement:

The move tool is much to important too keep as simplistic and primitive as you have currently made it

should be rather the oposit since our Snake tool is more advanced than sculptris grab. :P

What does setting the detail slider to zero in sculptris do? It turns of dynamic tessellation so it only works with what is already there.

Slider detail zero in LC halt all dynamic subdivision.

Slider smooth zero in LC halt all smoothing processing.

Any drop list parameter set to None will halt the corresponding processing.

Sculptris is a great app, awesome I may add and I can use it for inspiration, but I'm not trying/want to replicate or copy it into 3DCoat, and if you stress test it you can find many flags and limitations too.

Don't spend too much time flirting at the edges

this statement shows me that you didn't understand the point, when I was a user of any 3D app out there I thought the same, but sadly is the kind of knowledge that only can come from experience: the time spent on "flirting at the edges" is as important as the time spent "getting married with the core". And you told me once in your great Reduce tool review that most of the current issues where "settings" and settings are on the edges... so which of your both statements should I listen first?

And last but not least my friend

My time is limited so I don't have time to sugarcoat everything. I like to be clear and direct so my arguments get across

My time is also very limited, in fact I don't hang around in forums as much as I wish, yet I don't sugarcoat words but still they don't sound harsh, is not a matter of sugarcoating, is a way of thinking, or how the brain works, if I don't constantly think like a sharp blade then my words will effortlessly come out without need to soft them.

I do take you seriously as much as I take any 3dcoat user and artist that sincerely tries to help.

Kind Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Digital77

You have some good points but remember though unlike the other popular 3d programs that 3DC gets compared to there is just 2 developers working on the project and just Raul working on LiveClay as far as i know.

Sculptris was created from scratch by one man in 6 months during his spare time. Now I realize that Thomas Petterson is a uniquely skilled individual and that creating something from scratch could be easier then having to work with something pre-existing but the point still stands. I believe focus and vision are much more important then manpower when it comes to liveclay becoming a success.

Also i get a lot of people like Sculptris but if that is what people want and they need those tools now why not just use that program for now until LiveClay has developed more and is not beta.

I am. However you also know Sculptris is a small application and Pixologic has no intention whatsoever to mature it (last "update" is proof of that). This means that simple things such as working with multiple objects or even making selections (there is no lasso selection) are quite cumbersome.

With some adjustments LiveClay will be much better than Sculptris however and maybe even the big competition like ZB, Raul is doing some great work here in my opinion.

I certainly hope so but i highly doubt "some adjustments" is all it takes. People tend to look at Sculptris as "simple" and its anything but that. During development Thomas and Taron (you know who I'm talking about) worked very closely together. Taron himself commented on how special it was that not only was Thomas a great coder but he was also able to interpret and make work the feedback from the artists. I think that is what has made Sculptris the big succes that it is.

Even Raul mentions Sculptris as follows in his paper on dynamic subdivision; "it (Sculptris) quickly became a reference in the field, and forms the technical inspiration for this paper."

After all if later down the line everyone agrees there is no use for a certain mode/tool then it could simply be removed but while in beta it's fine.

That will never happen. I have seen this first hand with voxel sculpting. It's one of the reasons why a brush preset system is so important. There are trash brushes in voxel sculpting now just because people "loved" variant x. There is a point where catering to the individual does harm to the majority and that line was crossed plenty of times. The big problem with that is that it really is up to the programmer to decide what to cut and what to keep and for that you need courage and VISION (a deeper understanding of what is required when sculpting). If you decide to play it safe and please everyone you just end up with a bloated unoptimized mess where to most new users half the brushes and settings will seem broken or useless.

@Raul

in this case you should have wait for the tool to be out to emit your personal review of it.

I look forward to testing it firsthand in the next build.

I try my best to understand your point but now the baffled is me, Sculptris Grab tool is not the same as the MOVE tool, it may seems so but internally is more similar to the Snake tool which by the way, can get the same results (play a bit with the settings) and our current Snake implementation have some great advances there (wait for a new update) So you may be looking for the same behavior into our Move tool, you won't find it there, look into Snake for that ;)

I see your point in theory. However I can tell you that with 3.5.26A there is no way to even remotely emulate what the move tool does in Sculptris with the snakehook tool (show me the settings you talk about). Assuming a perfect brush preset system will become part of 3d-coat I could make a "Tweak" brush preset of the move type with remeshing turned off. Since I will be using it for small adjustments the stretching that will occur will be negligible in most cases so I could solve it with this "workaround". However I still don't see the current 3d-coat move or snakehook as a valid equal to Sculptris grab. Since you tell me to wait for a new update I will but I highly doubt that will bring me what I've been trying to explain to you.

Slider detail zero in LC halt all dynamic subdivision.

Slider smooth zero in LC halt all smoothing processing.

Any drop list parameter set to None will halt the corresponding processing.

You are correct. I was thinking of another tool which is not related to this discussion. If you set the reduce brush detail slider to zero it will still optimize but that is not relevant to my point. My bad.

but I'm not trying/want to replicate or copy it into 3DCoat, and if you stress test it you can find many flags and limitations too.

I refer to sculptris because its free, therefore accessible to you and in that way great to use as an example to clarify certain points. Feel free to improve upon everything it does in ways I cannot even fathom. Be careful about what you consider limitations. Some may actually be choices based on artist feedback. Technological perfection does not always equal great artists tools. The resampling on move is a good example of that. In theory a perfect surface is a resampled surface. In practice an artist sees his work being washed away with every tweak.

the time spent on "flirting at the edges" is as important as the time spent "getting married with the core"

Ok. :)

And you told me once in your great Reduce tool review that most of the current issues where "settings" and settings are on the edges... so which of your both statements should I listen first?

You should listen to the one that is valid in the current context. I took the reduce brush as an example in my review because it was technically "complete" so it was a great start point. Don't take my words out of context. With the move tool (which you seem intent on keeping the way it is currently implemented) the base technology is flawed. It does not -dynamically- tessellate. It simply resamples the surface after the deformation has taken place.

if I don't constantly think like a sharp blade then my words will effortlessly come out without need to soft them.

Nice way to put it. I will keep these words in mind. :)

3dioot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

After all if later down the line everyone agrees there is no use for a certain mode/tool then it could simply be removed but while in beta it's fine.

That will never happen. I have seen this first hand with voxel sculpting. It's one of the reasons why a brush preset system is so important. There are trash brushes in voxel sculpting now just because people "loved" variant x. There is a point where catering to the individual does harm to the majority and that line was crossed plenty of times. The big problem with that is that it really is up to the programmer to decide what to cut and what to keep and for that you need courage and VISION (a deeper understanding of what is required when sculpting). If you decide to play it safe and please everyone you just end up with a bloated unoptimized mess where to most new users half the brushes and settings will seem broken or useless.

I agree with 3dioot in almost everything he is writing in his post above. In particular I think that the many weird and broken brushes and the cluttered interface is a big problem. A brush preset system would be a very nice improvement to 3D-Coat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with 3dioot in almost everything he is writing in his post above. In particular I think that the many weird and broken brushes and the cluttered interface is a big problem. A brush preset system would be a very nice improvement to 3D-Coat.

There is already a preset system in 3D Coat, even for brushes...

Menu: Windows->Popups->Presets

It could be better, but fulfills the most wishes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

There is already a preset system in 3D Coat, even for brushes...

Menu: Windows->Popups->Presets

It could be better, but fulfills the most wishes.

What I am requesting is a preset system that allows the user save Tool, brush pressure settings, Alpha and brush settings in one preset. Is this already possible?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Wow nice, i have not had time to try it yet but thanks for the update i am sure it will be great :D

To anyone that disagreed with me before about the move tool i am not saying to keep tools that are not good just that for now in the "beta testing stage" it's not that important. As long as it doesn't get in the way of the GUI and it's in a mode dropdown etc then it's as i said before it can always be removed later. You could say "That will never happen" but it's not like it's certain that it would stay plus if the brush system and GUI system gets a major update (which i read somewhere they would) then it's likely some tools will be changed or removed to re-adjust the GUI anyway.

I definitely agree with people about the preset system however, in fact for a long time i have thought that the preset system needs a update and it's one of my main dislikes. It should be a major part of the program and enhance the workflow yet i did not find it that useful and i feel the same about the resource system also.

For resources i would much rather just have a regular folder/sub-folder browsing setup where i can organize textures and brushes on my system or use the same location i use for other programs also, currently like the presets i don't find it too useful. Hopefully with the possible GUI update both the resource and preset systems will get a major update though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For resources i would much rather just have a regular folder/sub-folder browsing setup where i can organize textures and brushes on my system or use the same location i use for other programs also, currently like the presets i don't find it too useful. Hopefully with the possible GUI update both the resource and preset systems will get a major update though.

You can use folders, this has been there for a long time, just click the small triangle in the upper corner of the brushes / materials and pick Add New Folder. I believe you can do this manually too if you really want to, just add a new folder to the directory where the brushes / materials are kept on your drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I tested the latest update yesterday and it's really good, the tools seem to work even better now :D

You can use folders, this has been there for a long time, just click the small triangle in the upper corner of the brushes / materials and pick Add New Folder. I believe you can do this manually too if you really want to, just add a new folder to the directory where the brushes / materials are kept on your drive.

I know you can do that already and it's how i add resources currently but that is not what i mean when i say use folders though. This process is also very slow and not a nice workflow in my opinion.

What i want is a true file browser like many other programs use where you have a tree listing of your actual systems folders and files.

So basically i could have a Textures folder like this for example which i link to -

\Textures

But then i can access any of it's sub folders of unlimited layers -

\Textures\Stone

\Textures\Stone\Surfaces

\Textures\Stone\Surfaces\Modern

\Textures\Stone\Surfaces\Decayed

\Textures\Stone\Carvings

\Textures\Metals

\Textures\Metals\Rust

Etc then you simply have any folders visible in the resource browser and could click them to go into them, also icons to make browsing simple like return to top folder, back/up a folder etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Having been testing the latest version of MeshMixer it reminded me of something i asked a while back which would be a increase brush/tool.

I know you can add detail with the LiveClay tool however this would be quite useful i think for when you do not actually want to sculpt at the same time and just want a nicer mesh flow.

Another useful tool would be a sort of relax mesh tool that can fade between low and high detail areas. So for example if you set the Reduce tools detail to a value of 0.10 and make a low res area then near to that had a LiveClay area with high detail amounts it would create a fading of resolutions. So rather than just low then high it would be low, medium and then high etc with a nice mesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi guys :)

Thanks to everyone, I'm taking note of all the issues/suggestions/requests you made and I'm evaluating them, but most of them will have to wait a bit untill LC get out of the beta stage, after that I can focus on Usability, ergonomics and GUI issues, firts I need to solve the internal functionality and we are working very hard to make a seamless glue between LC and the pre existent 3DCoat tools.

A quick news: http://farsthary.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/removeintersections-command/

A command that can be useful in self intersections use cases.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Farsthary,you(and Andrew) are doing a wonderful job!

Sometime I have given some negative feedback,but testing the last build on Linux gave me a lot of fun,it works really well(it's a great feeling working in surface mode)

Here there are some problems I found in the last days,nothing dramatic,mainly I think there are combination of tools which can give problems,the problem is that it's really hard understanding what combination can create problem(sorry if it sounds vague).

1)Sometimes when using the rapid2 brush and after the smooth brush(shift) it gives me a holes in the region I'm working on(resampling pressing enter fixes the problem).

2)Sometimes the CleanMesh command and the CleanUpMemory command give a surface with holes and spikes(this happens mainly when there is the previous problem,I think sometimes the internal storage become dirty and only resampling fixes it)

3)Sometimes the non liveclay brushes (rapid,mud,and so on,with remove streching on or off,it doesn't matter) creates spikes on the surface,using liveclay brush and after these brushes seem fixing the problem

All these things happen mainly when the surface is low res and when the sculpt session is really young(no more than 5/10 minutes from the start(I create a sphere with 60000 verts,I go in surface mode and I start to sculpt)-

After this time(and if you fix with resample) the problems don't show anymore(tested even 2/3 hours without problem)

4)Smooth brush with really low size radius acts more as a tiny noise modifier than smoothing(it gives thin perturbation to the surface making it a bit wavy).

Anyways,IMO this is allready better than Sculptris(3dcoat liveclay it's easier to work with(practically you can do complex shape without changing any parameters an the way liveclay works on angular regions,like neck and joint regions it's simply superior(in Sculptris in these regions you always have a poor meshing and you must be really careful to avoid problems)

keep it up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi guys :)

These days I've been very busy solving and fixing bugs so no basically new feature but lot of underground stuffs :) anyway that is good too, LC is getting feature complete (except a nice remaining one that will be tackled soon after getting stable enough: meshmixing capabilities ;))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Another use for the decimator is instead of using the resampler tool to reduce overall total polygon count as you are working on a model, you could use the decimator to reduce overall total polygon count but keep more in the detail areas as you are working on the model. nice...

Keep watching that snow and thinking outside the box... "He gives the gift of witty inventions"

Our imagination is one trait that all humans have, not just dreaming I'm talking about. To imagine, like Einstein or Newton, To think and compare, "TO See" To put forth the effort of thought and arrive at something that was here in existence but undiscovered. To see the world, understand it's order and build a structure of ideas, thoughts that change not only overselves but the world around us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...