POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.binaries.images : POVEarth: Greater Caucasus (n42e044 quadrangle)... or Didi Kavkasioni, as we Kartwelophiles prefer to say ;-) : Re: POVEarth: Greater Caucasus (n42e044 quadrangle)... or Didi Kavkasioni, = Server Time: 27 Oct 2020 12:48:55 GMT
  Re: POVEarth: Greater Caucasus (n42e044 quadrangle)... or Didi Kavkasioni, =  
From: Bald Eagle
Date: 20 Aug 2020 02:00:00
=?UTF-8?Q?J=c3=b6rg_=22Yadgar=22_Bleimann?= <yaz### [at] gmxde> wrote:

> > No one said anything about writing binary data.
> Then I don't understand you at all... must be the August heat in here!

> it's not just a basic
> mesh2, it's a mesh2 with smooth triangles and per-vertex textures! It
> has to have smooth triangles because otherwise there would be too much
> artifacts (gaps in the surface) - even now I sometimes find tiny white
> dots, but at least anti-aliasing is able to hide this.

> Who is Maurice?

Maurice Raybaud - "Mr", who writes / maintains the Blender-to-POV-Ray exporter.

> > The next question is: do you really need this kind of extreme resolution?
> > At this point?
> Hmmm, that's a question not too easy to answer... my aim in the long run
> is a full-fledged open sources Earth model with realistic detail in
> "pedestrian" perspective - POVEarth.

> Heightfields don't follow Earth's curvature, they are "flat", smaller
> images or larger steps I used with test renders, yes, they render pretty
> fast, but at a "pedestrian" perspective, they are much too crude.
> > I just looked at your old mesh file, and it's 24+MB.   That's a ton of
> > information for a single tile.
> My full-resolution mesh2 files are a cool 3 GiB! And it's obvious that,
> at 24 GiB RAM, only two of them already cause POV-Ray to crash...

Okay - you are biting off way too much using too few resources.
You might as well work out a Fourier transform with a handheld calculator.

I'm still convinced that your approach is far too excessively detailed for what
you actually need, and the method of generation is flawed, and therefore WAY too

I just created an animation of my whole planet in 46 min.
 360 frames of 24x24x6 tiles, each with 2 include files totaling 228 lines =
3456 x 228 lines = 787,968+ lines of code for each frame
x 360 frames = 283,668,480 lines
That's generating all 3456 tiles from scratch, with an index, reading both
include files in, and _rendering the scene_ 360 times - in 46 minutes.

your 3601x3601 has 16x the number of data points than I have lines, but I'mm
processing 22.5 times more ASCII information than you are in 0.375 of the amount
of time. or 2.66 times as fast.

That's like 60x as fast as whatever your script is doing.

Wouldn't you rather process that tile in ... 2 *minutes* ?

I'd like to see you create the renders that you want to make.
But you can't do it at the pace you're going, and nearly blowing up the computer
in the process.

Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2008 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.