I added Paul's stereoscopic cam 3 TIMES to megapov source.
Failed to parse camera.

So firing all my energy from the other direction I added motion blur to patched
povwin3.6 src.

I conclude the basic code for that and the basic code for megapov different
enough to create this parse error.

To: Nathan Kopp
Re: tokenize.h & MOTION_BLUR_PATCH

//#ifdef STORE_TOKEN_POSITION_START_IN_FILE_PATCH
#if defined(STORE_TOKEN_POSITION_START_IN_FILE_PATCH) ||
defined(MOTION_BLUR_PATCH)
POV_BASE_NAMESPACE::ITextStream::FilePos File_Pos;
  bool TokenFileChangedAfterSaveFilePos;
#endif


Here is the (first?) stereoscopic plus blur image.

I am now wondering would zeroparallax move by clock as she flies out of the
screen or where exactly should it be placed, argh trial error means I am not
smart enough!


Daz exported 4 meshes of R/L wings in each. It was rendering 8 wings that could
not be animated. Wrote a script to dissect the wing meshes.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'sky49_3d.png' (463 KB)

Preview of image 'sky49_3d.png'

Crossing Zero Parallax
Or fruit of the labor

6.5 hour frame:
I'll need about 8 CPUs on this production.

Vicky's translate pnt is 2 units in front of zero parallax.
Furthest object > 5 million units. With 30/1 dist/eyesep gives this 30-pixel
shift. Seemly a maximum shift or you start seeing double if too close.
Back about 4 feet and some R/B shades to appreciate this one.

Credits:
The list of those making this possible, intentionally and otherwise, is getting
a bit long. Gave up a long time ago thinking I might get this far on my budget.

My thanks,
aQ

love me hate me burry me ineffective
I'd use that but I kinda stole it but twisted it.
Oh well too late.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'ngc4725_3d.jpg' (314 KB)

Preview of image 'ngc4725_3d.jpg'

alphaQuad napsal(a):
> Crossing Zero Parallax
> Or fruit of the labor
> 
> 6.5 hour frame:
> I'll need about 8 CPUs on this production.
> 
> Vicky's translate pnt is 2 units in front of zero parallax.
> Furthest object > 5 million units. With 30/1 dist/eyesep gives this 30-pixel
> shift. Seemly a maximum shift or you start seeing double if too close.
> Back about 4 feet and some R/B shades to appreciate this one.
> 
> Credits:
> The list of those making this possible, intentionally and otherwise, is getting
> a bit long. Gave up a long time ago thinking I might get this far on my budget.
> 
> My thanks,
> aQ
> 
> love me hate me burry me ineffective
> I'd use that but I kinda stole it but twisted it.
> Oh well too late.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
I find it rather strange to have the planet in the sky level while the 
galaxy is much further.

Post a reply to this message

Jan Dvorak nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/01/02 04:01:
> alphaQuad napsal(a):
>> Crossing Zero Parallax
>> Or fruit of the labor
>>
>> 6.5 hour frame:
>> I'll need about 8 CPUs on this production.
>>
>> Vicky's translate pnt is 2 units in front of zero parallax.
>> Furthest object > 5 million units. With 30/1 dist/eyesep gives this 
>> 30-pixel
>> shift. Seemly a maximum shift or you start seeing double if too close.
>> Back about 4 feet and some R/B shades to appreciate this one.
>>
>> Credits:
>> The list of those making this possible, intentionally and otherwise, 
>> is getting
>> a bit long. Gave up a long time ago thinking I might get this far on 
>> my budget.
>>
>> My thanks,
>> aQ
>>
>> love me hate me burry me ineffective
>> I'd use that but I kinda stole it but twisted it.
>> Oh well too late.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> I find it rather strange to have the planet in the sky level while the 
> galaxy is much further.
Opticaly, they are both at "infinity". Any parallax difference between the two 
is absolutely negligible, like less than 0.000001 pixel whide, or less than 
0.0001 arc second angle. Madeup value that are probably much larger than the 
real ones.

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
WARNING: The consumption of alcohol may make you think you can logically 
converse with members of the opposite sex without spitting.

Post a reply to this message

Jan Dvorak <jan### [at] centrumcz> wrote:

> I find it rather strange to have the planet in the sky level while the
> galaxy is much further.

I just find it strange. (times 6.641458667 billion)
Only 24.5 million to go 'til there are 6.666 billion
if 5 per sec = 56 days or sometime this year
and a critical mass of angels

if one could only dream ...

Post a reply to this message

Alain napsal(a):
> Jan Dvorak nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/01/02 04:01:
>> alphaQuad napsal(a):
>>> Crossing Zero Parallax
>>> Or fruit of the labor
>>>
>>> 6.5 hour frame:
>>> I'll need about 8 CPUs on this production.
>>>
>>> Vicky's translate pnt is 2 units in front of zero parallax.
>>> Furthest object > 5 million units. With 30/1 dist/eyesep gives this 
>>> 30-pixel
>>> shift. Seemly a maximum shift or you start seeing double if too close.
>>> Back about 4 feet and some R/B shades to appreciate this one.
>>>
>>> Credits:
>>> The list of those making this possible, intentionally and otherwise, 
>>> is getting
>>> a bit long. Gave up a long time ago thinking I might get this far on 
>>> my budget.
>>>
>>> My thanks,
>>> aQ
>>>
>>> love me hate me burry me ineffective
>>> I'd use that but I kinda stole it but twisted it.
>>> Oh well too late.
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>> I find it rather strange to have the planet in the sky level while the 
>> galaxy is much further.
> Opticaly, they are both at "infinity". Any parallax difference between 
> the two is absolutely negligible, like less than 0.000001 pixel whide, 
> or less than 0.0001 arc second angle. Madeup value that are probably 
> much larger than the real ones.
> 
a stereo sparation of 30 pixels at a distance of 2 meters (the screen 
distance) equals to a parallax of 0.03 pixel at a distance of 2 
kilometers which is the altitude of the lowest clouds. Interstellar 
parallax is 10 orders of magnitude smaller.

Post a reply to this message