Try rendering scenes\interior\media\hollow1.pov in 3.6 and 3.7beta2.

  The former takes a bit over 2 seconds to render in my computer
(640x480 +a0.3 +am2) while the latter takes more than 1 minute and
the result looks completely different.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Also try hollo2.pov in the same directory. While the render time is
now more alike, the result is however quite different.
  Is 'hollow' working at all as it should?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Also try hollo2.pov in the same directory. While the render time is
> now more alike, the result is however quite different.
>   Is 'hollow' working at all as it should?

The truth being told,"hollow" does almost nothing in the first place.  And 
yes, it works.

	Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

Thorsten Froehlich <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> The truth being told,"hollow" does almost nothing in the first place.

  By the way, how about changing it, at last, to something else?-)

  Perhaps povray could cause a warning about it being deprecated and
suggest that the new keyword should be used instead.
  What the new keyword would be is open to suggestions. My vote goes
for "allow_media", but even I don't think it's perfect.

  (It would also be nice if an object which has an interior block
with a media block inside would have this property turned on by
default. You could then write "allow_media off" if for whatever
reason you want it that way.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>  What the new keyword would be is open to suggestions. My vote
> goes for "allow_media", but even I don't think it's perfect.

hollow also affects fog.

Rune
-- 
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
rune|vision:  http://runevision.com
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

Rune <run### [at] runevisioncom> wrote:
> hollow also affects fog.

  Fog can be thought as a very special version of media.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Thorsten Froehlich <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> 
>>The truth being told,"hollow" does almost nothing in the first place.
> 
> 
>   By the way, how about changing it, at last, to something else?-)
> 
>   Perhaps povray could cause a warning about it being deprecated and
> suggest that the new keyword should be used instead.
>   What the new keyword would be is open to suggestions. My vote goes
> for "allow_media", but even I don't think it's perfect.

Well, the problem has two sides.  One is that hollow is used to allow 
atmosphere to "leak" into an object.  The other is that it enabled media 
contained within an object.  Now, the second "feature" of hollow is fairly 
pointless.  If you add media to an object,why would you not want to make it 
hollow - because if you don't the media you specified just won't be visible.

The use with atmosphere on the other hand does make some sense.  But not the 
way it currently works because right now if you have an object with media 
inside, you cannot get rid off the atmosphere inside (well, you can with the 
object pattern and CSG operations, but lets not go there).  So yes, now that 
it is finally clear what the code does with hollow, we can make a better 
judgment about its usefulness.  But I will leave it at that for today...

	Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

Thorsten Froehlich <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> Well, the problem has two sides.  One is that hollow is used to allow 
> atmosphere to "leak" into an object.  The other is that it enabled media 
> contained within an object.  Now, the second "feature" of hollow is fairly 
> pointless.  If you add media to an object,why would you not want to make it 
> hollow - because if you don't the media you specified just won't be visible.

> The use with atmosphere on the other hand does make some sense.  But not the 
> way it currently works because right now if you have an object with media 
> inside, you cannot get rid off the atmosphere inside (well, you can with the 
> object pattern and CSG operations, but lets not go there).

  I think you are right. The current behaviour of 'hollow' is perhaps
a bit awkward and it probably was not thought thoroughly when it was
developed for the first time.

  You are right in that a more proper way of doing it would be that
objects can have their own media regardless of their properties and that
'hollow' (or whatever keyword) only says whether *other* medias and
atmospherical effects get into the object or not.

  In that sense "hollow" is a quite descriptive keyword, after all.
However, as we all know, practice has shown that it causes tons of
confusion to beginners and even not-so-beginners. They will often
think that it has something to do with CSG or how the object is
rendered (not related to any media/fog) even though it naturally
has no effect on those whatsoever.
  "hollow" is at the same time quite descriptive and very confusing
(because in real life hollowness refers to something quite different
than what it means in POV-Ray).

  I still think it should be changed to something else to avoid
confusions.
  How about "allow_atmosphere"?
  Or "blocks_atmosphere on/off"?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

>   "hollow" is at the same time quite descriptive and very confusing
> (because in real life hollowness refers to something quite different
> than what it means in POV-Ray).

Agreed.

>   I still think it should be changed to something else to avoid
> confusions.
>   How about "allow_atmosphere"?
>   Or "blocks_atmosphere on/off"?

parent_media? (Since you might put an object inside a large object that 
has media...)

Was wondering whether it should be an object modifier or go in the 
interior{} block... but than I realised that if you did that, there 
would be issues with not being able to replace textures and stuff...

Post a reply to this message

>   You are right in that a more proper way of doing it would be that
> objects can have their own media regardless of their properties and that
> 'hollow' (or whatever keyword) only says whether *other* medias and
> atmospherical effects get into the object or not.


I agree with this and have been thinking this for a while.

>   I still think it should be changed to something else to avoid
> confusions.
>   How about "allow_atmosphere"?
>   Or "blocks_atmosphere on/off"?

Wouldn't it be more convenient, for the newbie and the experienced user, if
it were on by default (external media was allowed)? Since it's common to
have multiple large media containers in the same scene and expect the medias
to all appear everywhere within their containers. Then the keyword could be
something like "ignore_external_media" or something.

 - Slime
 [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]

Post a reply to this message