"Rune" <run### [at] inamecom> wrote in message
news:39cf6b29@news.povray.org...
| "Bob Hughes" wrote:
|
| > If wanting a complete 360 degree field shown as rectangular
| > that requires greater than 360 degree field...
| > how can that be done then?
|
| Since when has angles greater than 360 degrees been a problem? Read the
| documentation.

I was just trying to go on one simple thought about it, I haven't checked
into any of it.  What I was saying is that if there were a fisheye
projection (for lack of a better word) having rectangular boundaries then
your solution would be using a angle going to the corners not the sides.
That means loss of field of view for a fraction of the whole intended by a
given angle in the camera, ie. 360 is seen only at the corners of a square
aspect resolution and not the sides.  Clipped.

| > It would have limitations anyhow.
|
| Exactly what is that statement based on? Facts? I don't think so.
| Indications? I don't see any. To me it is obvious that it would actually
| have no limitations at all. It even works perfectly with the clumsy method
I
| provided.

I would guess it's all in how such a thing would be implemented.

Bob

Post a reply to this message