In article <3dd3d95c@news.povray.org> , "Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> 
wrote:

> What I'm getting at is that at no point have you said "ah, I misunderstood",
> even though you evidently did.

No, I misunderstood absolutely nothing.  I simply asked for more details,
and then mentioned that the two ways I could possibly understand what Warp
says will both not work.

After all, you lectured me on the most simple fact possible, so obviously
you just jumped on something I said, ignored that it was a question
(questionmarks are valid in English, aren't they?), and then go on and
accuse me of misunderstanding when I ask a question?

I think I will just killfile you.  Sorry!

    Thorsten


To quote your initial reply:
> Huh? I think you're missing the point. As far as I can see, starting one
> render from the last frame and another from the first frame is the only way to
> ensure the best distribution of work. Take 16 random numbers between 1 and 100
> and place them in sequence:
>
> 34, 43,11, 76, 32, 2, 23, 73, 83, 23, 76, 63, 31,63,68,65
>
> Numbers 1 to 8 add to 294, 8 to 16 add to 472. Without knowing the render time
> of each frame prior to rendering, the only way I can ensure that both renders
> finish at the same time is to start one render at one end of the sequence, and
> the other render at the other end of the sequence.


____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message