Am 28.02.2016 um 07:59 schrieb clipka:
> Ha!
>
> Does this look familiar to anyone?

In deed. It does ;)

> It turns out that the root problem _is_ also present in the Windows
> version -- but it's masked by a peculiarity of the run-time library's
> handling of special floating-point values.
>
> What happens is that _somewhere_ in the photon computations one of the
> mathematical operations results in "not a sensible value", which carries
> over into the computed colour values. How such values behave in the
> conversion to the RGBE format depends on the run-time library
> implementation: On Windows it results in zero values, thus "healing" the
> problem. On Linux however, it results in rather high values instead.

Frustration turned into and idea. Fine :)

Will there be a new master in the near future? Please don't get me 
wrong... Only asking because I would like to "play around" with the 
latest master.

Post a reply to this message

Am 28.02.2016 um 08:07 schrieb ThH:

> Will there be a new master in the near future? Please don't get me
> wrong... Only asking because I would like to "play around" with the
> latest master.

Depends on your definition of "near future" ;)

I guess I'll be able to figure out and fix the root cause today or
tomorrow. Until then, I see no point in releasing some interim workaround.

Post a reply to this message

Am 28.02.2016 um 08:55 schrieb clipka
:
> Am 28.02.2016 um 08:07 schrieb ThH:
>
>> Will there be a new master in the near future? Please don't get me
>> wrong... Only asking because I would like to "play around" with the
>> latest master.
>
> Depends on your definition of "near future" ;)
>
> I guess I'll be able to figure out and fix the root cause today or
> tomorrow. Until then, I see no point in releasing some interim workaround.

Thanks for this info :)

I'm toddling off... Got some toying around to do ;)

Post a reply to this message

Am 28.02.2016 um 09:14 schrieb ThH:

> I'm toddling off... Got some toying around to do ;)

Talking of high values...

What will happen using lower values?

To approaches concerning the media-box:

box {<-7,-0.1,-3>, < 6, 1, 4> hollow
     texture {pigment {color rgbf 1}}
     interior {
         media {
             //scattering {1, color White extinction 0} // 01 (Original 
optics.pov)
             //scattering {1, color White-<0,0,1> extinction 0} // 02
             scattering {1, color White extinction 0+12} // 3 (Docs: 
..artistic freedom...) // 03
             //emission color White*0.2
             method 3
             intervals 1 samples 4
         }
     }
     photons {target}
}

Of any use ?

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'optics_sandbox_hv_01.png' (43 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_hv_02.png' (38 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_hv_03.png' (34 KB)

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_hv_01.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_hv_02.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_hv_03.png'

Am 28.02.2016 um 09:37 schrieb ThH:

> To approaches concerning the media-box:

Two... Heaven!

Moving the mirrors +<1,0,0>...

// 00 - Original optics.pov
object {Mirror(<-3, 0, 0>, 3*45, 2, 1, BlueMirrorTex)}
object {Mirror(<-3, 0, 3>,-45, 2, 1, MirrorTex1)}

// 01 - Variation 1
object {Mirror(<-3, 0, 0>+<1,0,0>, 3*45, 2, 1, BlueMirrorTex)}
object {Mirror(<-3, 0, 3>+<1,0,0>,-45, 2, 1, MirrorTex1)}

// 00 - Original optics.pov
//object {Mirror(<-1, 0, 0>, 180+22.5, 2, 1, RedMirrorTex)}
//object {Mirror(<-3, 0,-2>, 22.5, 2, 1, MirrorTex1)}

// 02 - Variation 2
object {Mirror(<-1, 0, 0>+<1,0,0>, 180+22.5, 2, 1, RedMirrorTex)}
object {Mirror(<-3, 0,-2>+<1,0,0>, 22.5, 2, 1, MirrorTex1)}

// 03 - Variation 3
// 01 + 02

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'optics_sandbox_g_00.png' (43 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_g_01.png' (39 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_g_02.png' (37 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_g_03.png' (40 KB)

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_g_00.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_g_01.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_g_02.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_g_03.png'

Am 28.02.2016 um 10:45 schrieb ThH:
> Am 28.02.2016 um 09:37 schrieb ThH:
> 
>> To approaches concerning the media-box:
> 
> Two... Heaven!

No need for any more toying.

You might want to test the newest version though :D

Post a reply to this message

Am 28.02.2016 um 11:04 schrieb clipka:

> No need for any more toying.
>
> You might want to test the newest version though :D

Great. Will.

Couldn't resist...

Changing the falloff:

Relevant code from the second light source

     //spotlight radius 0.3 falloff 0.35 point_at < 0, 0.5, 0> // 00 
(Original optics.pov)
     //spotlight radius 0.3 falloff 0.35*20 point_at < 0, 0.5, 0> // 01
     //spotlight radius 0.3 falloff 0.35*10 point_at < 0, 0.5, 0> // 02
     //spotlight radius 0.3 falloff 0.35*5 point_at < 0, 0.5, 0> // 03
     //spotlight radius 0.3 falloff 0.35*.25 point_at < 0, 0.5, 0> // 04
     //spotlight radius 0.3 falloff 0.35/.25 point_at < 0, 0.5, 0> // 05
     //spotlight radius 0.3 falloff 0.35/5 point_at < 0, 0.5, 0> // 06
     //spotlight radius 0.3 falloff 0.35/10 point_at < 0, 0.5, 0> // 07
     spotlight radius 0.3 falloff 0.35/20 point_at < 0, 0.5, 0> // 08

Now let's build the new version :))

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'optics_sandbox_fo2_00.png' (43 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_fo2_01.png' (51 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_fo2_02.png' (51 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_fo2_03.png' (53 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_fo2_04.png' (32 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_fo2_05.png' (47 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_fo2_06.png' (31 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_fo2_07.png' (27 KB) Download 'optics_sandbox_fo2_08.png' (26 KB)

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_fo2_00.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_fo2_01.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_fo2_02.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_fo2_03.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_fo2_04.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_fo2_05.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_fo2_06.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_fo2_07.png'

Preview of image 'optics_sandbox_fo2_08.png'

Le 28/02/2016 11:12, ThH a écrit :
> Am 28.02.2016 um 11:04 schrieb clipka:
> 
>> No need for any more toying.
>>
>> You might want to test the newest version though :D

> Now let's build the new version :))


POV-Ray 3.7.1-alpha.8499454.unofficial
Gitid: 5b5e312523b226e5be1409f270325b66b5c92bf9

no more problem in optics.pov and gnu compiler

Now I have to report it to my branch too.

Post a reply to this message

Am 28.02.2016 um 11:12 schrieb ThH:
> Am 28.02.2016 um 11:04 schrieb clipka:
>
>> No need for any more toying.
>>
>> You might want to test the newest version though :D

Case closed. You made it :)))

Thank you and all those involved in the process...

High 5, 10, 15, 20, ... !

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'optics.png' (233 KB)

Preview of image 'optics.png'

On 02/28/2016 05:04 AM, clipka wrote:
>
> You might want to test the newest version though :D
>

Cool! You got the bug - thanks.

I am seeing some shift in optics.pov result 3.7.0 stable to POV-Ray 
3.7.1-alpha.8499454. I like the new, less intense, result over the old, 
but is this 3.7.0 to 3.7.1 change expected ?

Bill P.

Post a reply to this message