Give a hoot, don't pollute!

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'earth2.avi.dat' (372 KB)

But there's so much more air to breathe.  Well okay, so it's dirty air.  More of
it though.
This Avi file suffered from the dreaded first frame degradation I notice.

Bob

Post a reply to this message

> But there's so much more air to breathe.  Well okay, so it's dirty air.  More of
> it though.

Heh.  I didn't get around to trying anything fancy.  I was just changing the
extinction value for the scattering media when I noticed it changed everything to
red the higher I went.

> This Avi file suffered from the dreaded first frame degradation I notice.

Yeah I don't know what that was about.  I compressed it with Cinepak.

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike wrote in message <3886AEFB.E9567B17@aol.com>...
>Give a hoot, don't pollute!


I must admit to agreeing with this philosophy.

Pretty cool how you animated it.

My simplistic take on the environment:
I compare the Rain Forests to my Hard Drive.
So much vast space to begin with,
Then,  I turn around and it is almost full.

/*
rant on
What is the friggin' deal with frame speed?
(Pardon my 'french' I know this is a family
 newsgroop).
Why is most every mpg I see too fast.
I use Media Player 6.4.
Maybe I am to old school but I wish
everyone would post flc's.  That way
I could control the frame speed.

And while rant is on I would like to
completely and wholeheartedly
disagree with  Bob (Omni) [a most excellent
and talented individual, for sure].
I think that the image size for p.b.i. should
be, if anything raised, and that for p.b.a.
should be reduced.
Most ani's that I see (whatever the
quality) could be reduced in size.
I am tired of seeing small images
in p.b.i. and large bloated ani's
in p.b.a.
Unless I am mistaken, size is an issue.
There is a limited amount of space on this
server.

I will go even further in this rant and
say that the power of pov's animation
capabilities is being abused.

(Here I must add that I am in
*no* way criticizing any one piece
or any individual. )

I believe that P.B.A and P.B.I. should be
merged (oh great, now I am sounding
like a fri***ng communist, how unenduring.)

Is not every Pov piece an animation?
This for me is one of the great beauties
of Pov. Every image can be animated,
can it not?
rant off */
Oh, dear, I do go on.

Peter Warren
war### [at] hotmailcom

Post a reply to this message

Peter Warren wrote:

> And while rant is on I would like to
> completely and wholeheartedly
> disagree with  Bob (Omni) [a most excellent
> and talented individual, for sure].
> I think that the image size for p.b.i. should
> be, if anything raised, and that for p.b.a.
> should be reduced.
> Most ani's that I see (whatever the
> quality) could be reduced in size.
> I am tired of seeing small images
> in p.b.i. and large bloated ani's
> in p.b.a.
> Unless I am mistaken, size is an issue.
> There is a limited amount of space on this
> server.

Size is an issue and server space it not infinite. I do not see
the problem with p.b.i.. It has a server imposed limit of 1 meg.
If you use a modest amount of image compression in the format
you post then you really should be able to post a fairly large
image if you choose to do so. Most people here ask that you do
not post image over a certain file size simply because they
pay for their time online by the minute. P.B.I. is the most
popular group on this sever and it is one that everyone subscribes
to. For this reason it is mostly a matter of courtesy that
everyone has agreed to try to keep file sizes to a minimum
in that group. To limit this group to even smaller file sizes
than are what allowed not would probably result in 70% fewer
posts. I do not think that this would go over very well with
those that like to get comments on their work.
 
> I will go even further in this rant and
> say that the power of pov's animation
> capabilities is being abused.

Say What ?
 

> Is not every Pov piece an animation?

No.

> This for me is one of the great beauties
> of Pov. Every image can be animated,
> can it not?

The question remains is if the image needs to be animated to
tell it's story. I personaly do not think so or I would do a
lot more animation work than I do now. For the most part they
do not interest me.


> Oh, dear, I do go on.

Yes you do :)

-- 
Ken Tyler -  1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

"Peter Warren" <int### [at] halcyoncom> wrote
>
> Is not every Pov piece an animation?
> This for me is one of the great beauties
> of Pov. Every image can be animated,
> can it not?
>

    Well, for me... I don't see why some people make some of the stills they
do unless they also want to animate them. I mean, sure, some of the better
work would be hard to duplicate in a 2D paint program, but most of it would
be easier and faster in any of the better paint programs.

    In fact I find it much more satisfying to use a paint program sometimes.

    But when I want the object to be something that can interact with other
objects, or if I ever want to see the other side of the object, I go
straight to POV. I use POV instead of AutoCad for some of the work I am
doing. The accuracy is the same and the finished product is so much better.
Sometimes I will use AutoCad if I want a bunch of comments or dimensioning
in the image, but otherwise it is POV because I want to be able to show the
motion of my work.

    So for me, animatability is the main goal with POV. Every one of the
objects in my private Library is set up to animate. Even things that have
never been used in an animation have the parameters built in, just in case I
want to use them in an animation someday.

Post a reply to this message