In article <3f5cbfa2@news.povray.org>, tji### [at] euskalnetnet says...

> MPG.19c5a4f7920f481498989f@news.povray.org...
> > >  Modellers for povray?. Almost every 3D$ program can act
> > > as a modeller for povray
> > Sort of...
> 
> I was talking about meshes, obviously, not CSG.
> If the 3D$ program can export to obj., .dxf or .3ds
> you can use it in Povray using Poseray, that has an
> excellent mesh2 output.
> 
True enough.

> "..., but there's also a more hidden advantage
> to mesh2 : its syntax is close to the obj format (lists of vertices,
> normals, uvs). If you can output to mesh2 you can figure out how to
> output to OBJ (I think Rune did something like this). And OBJ, unlike
> mesh2 which is POV-only, is a popular 3d format which means that
> your app could export to any 3d application out there from Bryce to
> Maya."
> 
Yes, but having to export to .obj, then covert it again someplace else is 
a pain in the rear. It would be nicer to get the Mesh2 from the start or 
have support of .obj in pov itself. This also won't work for anything 
that isn't outputable in .obj. With the amount of stuff I download and 
install, and keep installed, I can't afford dozens of programs to cover 
all contingencies. If other people can, then good for them, but it 
frustrates me. lol

> > If it doesn't output native POV code or
> > only supports a version from 10 years ago, or fails to support some basic
> > features (Moray's direct addition of SDL doesn't count imho, especially
> > if it is an object you are trying to add and position), then it isn't
> > really a good POV-Ray modeller.
> 
> I think Moray direct addition of SDL does count.
The problem here is that it often fails to support commonly use, but non-
standard things like negative lights or values outside of specified 
ranges. This may make sense from the standpoint of following the spec, 
but it is a problem when it fails to account for the way things are 
actually used. Another example is how you can link a camera or light to 
each other in SDL, or even to an object, but you can't do so in Moray. If 
you are doing animation, this means a potential mess of extra work. All 
these things could be done in the direct SDL, but if I am using a 
modeller, I want to do it in the modeller. If I have to use SDL anyway, I 
may as well do the entire thing in the SDL, since I have better control 
over things anyway.

The fact that you can do something doesn't mean it is convenient to do 
so. And it undermines the whole point of having a GUI to build the scene 
in, since you can't check any of it unless you render. Same goes for 
using a substitute object. It is problematic at best in some cases to use 
such a limited stand in and have everything behave the way you planned. 
Moray is getting better, but there are still things it does that bug me.

> But Moray really outputs native POV code, supports the last version and
> the basic (and some advanced) features of POV by itself.
> Almost everythng I model is done in Moray or in Hamapatch and Moray,
> and my scenes are usually a mixture of meshes or bicubic patches and CSG.
> I wouldn't say that Moray isn't really a good POV-Ray modeller, simply
> 'cos that's not true.
> 
If everything else is worse, it doesn't mean that it can compare to the 
built in ones that things like Maya use. It is the best one available, 
and in that sense it is 'good', but it isn't as good as it needs to be to 
compare to its potential rivals.

> > A 'real' modeller for POV-Ray would have to be 100%
> > supportive of the current version and at least attempt to provide native
> > and 'accurate' conversion of models from other popular apps. Having 16
> > different programs to do this, because all of them are missing something
> > you need, isn't helpful in the least from my view.
> 
> I also miss in Moray a feature relative to conversion of other 3D formats.
> It was discussed in moray.beta and the short answer is "use 3DWin" :(
> Anyway, since I use Povray I have used a lot of different programs to
> do different things (from sPatch to TextureView) and we are talking
> mainly about freeware programs or low cost shareware. Usually is
> the price you have to pay if you don't want to pay real money. But
> is something I can live with (and enjoy ;-).
> 
In the 3D world, real money means compatible to everyone else (or with 
conversion), as long as they change at least 25% of the highest price 
program in the bunch. I don't particularly consider that an incentive to 
even consider buying it, since the result is $250 tools that won't do 
much of anything for products that you may have to pay a minimum of 
$1000, for the 'learning' version. Most of these can't or won't produce 
anything as high quality as POV-Ray, even if they do it a bit faster. 
Must be the platinum and diamond filler they put in their boxes we are 
expected to pay for, though I have never found anything but cardboard in 
the ones I bought. I must just have really bad luck. ;) lol

-- 
void main () {

    call functional_code()
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

Post a reply to this message