Ray Gardener wrote:
> 
> I didn't plan on supporting any scanline-only
> primitives, if that's what you meant. My prototype
> will support a subset of existing POV primitives,
> so that whatever the scanline system can render,
> the raytracer can render.

Quoting from your original post:

> I'm currently investigating development of a
> scanline renderer, because the scenes I need
> to support (landscape scenes) typically contain
> too many objects for efficient raytracing.

Sorry but i simply don't get it.  Your original motivation for considering
implementing scanline rendering in POV-Ray is to allow something that is
not possible in POV-Ray as you state (i.e. efficient rendering of scenes
with many objects).  But now you write you will only support a subset of
those shapes already available in POV-Ray - how does this fit together?

I think this whole thread suffers from one serious problem - You never
made a clear and open statement of your objectives and you don't seem to
be willing to discuss whether your idea for a solution (i.e. scanline
rendering) will meet your objectives.  All people who replied to you in
this thread have a good deal of experience with POV-Ray in various fields
but i have the impression that you either ignore or don't understand most
of the arguments we have given.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 28 Feb. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message