On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:00:02 -0500, Francois Labreque 
<fla### [at] videotronca> wrote:

> Program ended abnormally on 12/03/2004 08:00, Due to a catastrophic Phil 
> Cook error:
>
>> I was wary of posting this to p.programming as although it is to do 
>> with POV-Ray the program it's something that may already exist that 
>> I've missed.
>
> p.programming is for discussing the actual source code.  Feature 
> requests should go here.

Good I was worried I'd offend someone.

>> I have two files open File1 and File2 I render them both in that order, 
>> I switch to edit File1 and hit show and of course the File2 image 
>> appears, is there any way that POV-Ray can retain a memory that File1 
>> has been rendered and display *that* image as opposed to the last one. 
>> I wouldn't expect it to last beyond the session, but a temporary memory 
>> would be nice IMHO instead of having to open an external imager to see 
>> the image or re-render.
>>
>> I'm well prepared to be slapped down on this if the implementation is 
>> horrendous or if it's some switch I've missed, but it was just a 
>> thought.
>>
>
> No it isn't a switch you've missed.  The "show" button will only display 
> the last image you've rendered.

Oh goodie, not me being dense as usual then,

> I agree with you that having a more versatile "show" button (or having a 
> menu item that allowed to display recently rendered images) could be a 
> nice addition that wouldn't be too hard too implement,

It's just something I thought of as I wanted to show someone a render I'd 
just done, but had one in-between which meant opening up an extra program.

> but having an image viewing app loaded on your pc alongside POV isn't 
> too hard for the user to implement, either. ;-)

Umm, but that's a little similiar to the argument being held over 
JPEG2000, why should someone have to open an external viewer when the 
program you're using supports inline viewing. IMO it's not a difficulty 
just err... inelegant :)

--
Phil

-- 
All thoughts and comments are my own unless otherwise stated and I am 
happy to be proven wrong.

Post a reply to this message