Christoph Hormann wrote:
> Right, but it would be much more robust compared
> to your method and you won't need something like
> 'particle_bounceoffset' and 'particle_killobj'
> which also makes things easier.

particle_bounceoffset is a single value that is very easy to tweak.
particle_killobj is used for completely different purposes, where you
intentionally wants object killed when they hit a specific object.

This can in no way be compared to the complexity it is to define any
given surface in the term of a function. With the object approach you
can have a CSG object with hundreds of primitives in it and make the
particles collide with it, or you can use a mesh object for that matter.
That is next to impossible with functions. I don't see why you seem to
think that it is such a great advantage to use function based
environments, if you compare the pros and cons.

> Not really, but a look at the source reverals that
> you seem to do it the right way.

Well, the description "inner workings" on the page should not be taken
as an accurate description with precise formulas. I think there are even
some things in my system which does not really correspond to that
description, because it's meant to explain the most basic concept only.

>> Well, it's important for me that people don't make
>> profit on my work; perhaps more important than how
>> great success my tool gets.
>
> In general?

Yes, in general, but not without exceptions.

> You contributed to the POV-Ray 3.5 include files
> although those are allowed to be used commercially.

Yes. But that was not my own project, it was just a project I helped
with.

> most professionals (and also ambitious hobbyists)
> like clear conditions and don't want to depend on
> your generosity when they start using your tool.
> If you think your include file is worth some
> payment for being used commercially you should
> clearly state that in the terms of use.

Yeah, I should do that...

> Well, i think the reasons for you creating such
> restrictions are somewhat understandable but i
> somehow doubt they have the intended effect.

Well, I intent to keep most of the restriction, but perhaps in a
different form.

> For me knowing my products are used by a lot of
> people, no matter if for making profit or not,
> seems more rewarding than knowing nobody can
> legally make money using my tools.

I don't feel that way. But then, I have very little money myself, which
probably makes even worse the thought of other people making profit on
my work.

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
rune|vision:  http://runevision.com (updated Oct 19)
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message