> I don't think it would be feasible to pack this kind of algorithms in 
> POV-Ray easily. It's not just a matter of shooting more rays, they use 
> different definitions for materials that wouldn't be compatible with the 
> POV-Ray way.

Existing definition of pigments should work for any algorithm. Normal 
perturbations would work with some; not all actually use the normal 
vector. The whole finish and interior blocks may need to be different 
for each rendering algorithm. Objects would have no problem either, 
except for those that have built-in normal perturbation 
(smooth_triangle, bicubic patch, and smooth heightfield; any other?).

> On the other hand, I never looked at the source code of POV-Ray, so 
> maybe judge for yourself.
> 
It will be rewritten for 4.0 anyway, so we might as well...

Post a reply to this message