Am 22.02.2013 09:09, schrieb Kenneth:
> I've just methodically rendered all the demo scenes in the advanced folder (only
> in v3.62, sorry) and, honestly, I think all of them are still 'useful' in one
> way or another, if only for coding examples. Maybe CATS (povcatray.pov) looks a
> bit out of date visually (an understatement!); but even that might have nuggets
> of code that beginners would still find useful.
cats/povcatray.pov looks really "a bit out of date"!
But I also agree with your "but even".
Ingo Janssen did much more attractive things like grenadine.pov !

> The DRUMS2 scene has some extraneous old text that could be removed.
That text descripes how Dan Farmer in 1992 (20 years ago!) made
the background image with FRACTINT, an old fractal program.
I think this text should stay there by "historical reasons".

> The only scene that seems to have an actual problem is DESK. It's an animation
> file, but I can't get it to animate using only the included desk.ini file (which
> contains the animation parameters.) Perhaps I'm doing something wrong; someone
> else needs to give that scene a try.
This file needs:
1. Output_File_Type=N  (for png) //no command line like +fj ...
2. remove any output path  ( ;Output_File_Name="..." )
    that the rendered images come in the directory of desk.pov
    and desk.ini,
or move both in your output path for run.
The file desk.ini runs desk.pov 4 times to produce the effect of
  "an image in an image in an image ... "
Interesting method, it but needs an additional instruction.

> A more 'global' thing concerning the various scenes is that they have different
> assumed_gamma settings (or none at all.) No doubt a result of their age; but
> that might be a source of confusion with v3.7. Of course, that's the way they
> were set up, so I wouldn't know what to recommend (if anything.)
I'll try to add assumed_gamma in global_settings, where this is missing.

> Also, some of the scenes have an explicit #version 3.5 directive. Just wondering
> if those should be changed to at least 3.6.
Yes, I think so too!

> The day before Chris posted this message, I also happened to go through all of
> the  various 'cameras' in the SCENES/CAMERA folder, and found a few minor things
> that need attention. In many of the files, there is a 'boilerplate' text
> section...
>
> "don't forget to render this with the image ratio equal to 1 (height = width),
> or, instead of being framed in a half-circle, the upper part of the image will
> be "squished" into a half-ellipse."
>
> In more than a few cases this is wrong, on two counts: The 'fisheye' and
> omnimax' cameras need a 4:3-ratio render, not 1:1; and the stuff about being
> "squished into a half-elipse" is a mystery altogether. (I can't honestly say if
> this text section is right *or* wrong in the four 'cylinder' cameras, but it's
> there too.) BTW, the text section in the 'spherical' camera is correct AFAIK.
Good hints! Thank you!
I want also add (where it's missing) a
"right  x*image_width/image_height" to keep propotions of the results
with any aspect ratio. This avoids the effect that people think that
the image looks distorted, when they render the files without reading
the instructions about the resolutions.

Post a reply to this message