 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3cf7dfed@news.povray.org> , "Slime" <slm### [at] slimeland com> wrote:
> Hmm... order no longer matters. Then you might want to change the error for
> non-perpendicular camera vectors, which says that "making look_at the last
> statement might help."
As look_at is always applied after up/right and look_at forces perpendicular
vectors there no longer is such a problem...
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> As look_at is always applied after up/right and look_at forces
perpendicular
> vectors there no longer is such a problem...
There is if you apply a matrix transformation after the look_at vector that
shears the camera. (I know of this since it's an issue with my zoomin.inc
file)
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3cf90440@news.povray.org> , "Slime" <slm### [at] slimelandcom> wrote:
> There is if you apply a matrix transformation after the look_at vector that
> shears the camera. (I know of this since it's an issue with my zoomin.inc
> file)
This was not my point. It is a very bad idea to apply look_at after the
transformations as it would undo them and thus most transformations would be
pointless to begin with...
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich
e-mail: mac### [at] povrayorg
I am a member of the POV-Ray Team.
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> "Slime" <slm### [at] slimelandcom> wrote:
>
>> There is if you apply a matrix transformation
>> after the look_at vector that shears the camera.
>
> This was not my point. It is a very bad idea to
> apply look_at after the transformations as it
> would undo them and thus most transformations
> would be pointless to begin with...
Thorsten, did you even read what Slime wrote?
He said that if a matrix transformation is applied *after* the look_at
vector, the error message says that it might help to make the look_at
the last statement. This error message does not make sense with the
POV-Ray 3.5 camera.
Minimal test scene that produces the error:
camera {
location 0
look_at z
matrix <1,0,0,0,1,0,1,0,1,0,0,0>
}
// insert 25 speres to turn on vista buffer
#declare C = 0;
#while (C<25)
sphere {z,0.1 pigment {rgb 1}}
#declare C = C+1;
#end
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 20)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3cf9180e@news.povray.org> , "Rune" <run### [at] mobilixnetdk>
wrote:
> Thorsten, did you even read what Slime wrote?
>
> He said that if a matrix transformation is applied *after* the look_at
> vector, the error message says that it might help to make the look_at
> the last statement. This error message does not make sense with the
> POV-Ray 3.5 camera.
No, but the warning itself does.
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> "Rune" wrote:
>> He said that if a matrix transformation is applied *after* the
>> look_at vector, the error message says that it might help to make
>> the look_at the last statement. This error message does not make
>> sense with the POV-Ray 3.5 camera.
>
> No, but the warning itself does.
I'm not sure what you mean. We may agree.
My point is that both the occurrence of the warning and the error make
sense, but the warning text should be changed.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 20)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3cf92f29$1@news.povray.org> , "Rune" <run### [at] mobilixnetdk>
wrote:
> My point is that both the occurrence of the warning and the error make
> sense, but the warning text should be changed.
Well, the warning is the same for both the 3.1 and 3.5 code and it cannot with
absolute certainty check correctly if version 3.1 or 3.5 was active when the
camera was declared at the time this check is made. WHile the message is not
perfect, it isn't completely wrong either.
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> Well, the warning is the same for both the
> 3.1 and 3.5 code and it cannot with absolute
> certainty check correctly if version 3.1 or 3.5
> was active when the camera was declared at the
> time this check is made. WHile the message is
> not perfect, it isn't completely wrong either.
In a case like this I would presume that the warnings being correct for
the actual version of the software would be of higher priority.
In any case, to avoid too much confusion, the warning could be changed
from:
"Making look_at the last statement may help"
to:
"Making look_at the last statement may help if the version is set to
3.1"
or similar. But I think it would be better to drop it completely.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 20)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OK, apparently I confused look_at with direction.
But anyway, you said
> The docs clearly explain that the order
> dependencies have been removed in the 3.5 camera. Any oder will yield exactly
> the same effect.
while the manual (RC5, Redhat Linux, 300MHz, 64MB) says:
The look_at modifier changes both up and right
so you should always specify them before look_at.
Also the angle calculation depends on the right vector
so right should precede it.
in paragraph 6.4.1.5
Mark Weyer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in news:3CFB0FF6.FEE59A87@frege.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de Mark Weyer
wrote:
> The look_at modifier changes both up and right
> so you should always specify them before look_at.
>
Will be removed,
Thanks,
Ingo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
