"Mr" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>
> Yes, I understand, and this time I totally agree with you. that is why I love
> POV-Ray: maturity.
>
> Blender is relatively young. its community sometimes suffered from what we call
> "jeunisme" in french, the tendancy to believe that what is new is necessarily
> better. that's why most blenderheads rushed to Mitsuba, Luxrender, Yafaray,
> Kerkythea, Thea, Octane, Aqsis...  etc, without ever considering to help
> modernize and integrate POV-Ray, simply because "it is old". LuxRender has had
> up to 16 enthusiast developers, Cycles is driven almost full time by one of the
> most professional, skilled an experienced developers available.
> However four/five years or more after their creations, POV-Ray still offers some
> functionality unavailable to them (Continue Trace) and has caught up with some
> of its new candies (Real Time stochastic Rendering) to be fair, POV-Ray still
> misses some features but these give no other difference in the final result than
> rendering time (this could be debatable, for the way some features such as
> spectral rendering would leverage more ressources and help overcome some POV-Ray
> "crashing points", do show if you try the most extreme refractive caustics
> scenes in POV-Ray and compare them with LuxRender results at the time of writing
> this)
>
> Because some of the Blender friendly external renderers and their exporters'
> development kept drying out. The solution chosen was to nest the development of
> the rendering engine inside the Blender Foundation to harvest all of the
> community energy and feedback. This DID work, and Cycles development has been
> blazingly fast and did not die. We could consider that with the manpower used in
> all of these renderers povray 4 would already be there, but it would be like
> considering you could put a town in a bottle if only every house was smaller.
>
> Probably you are working in an area of blender (the nodes) that is less stable
> than the rest now, the basic material and render API used to change often too
> but has now stabilized. Here again, being in official addon repository has
> helped, because developers helping to propagate their api changes themselves
> made them hold their horses. If you really want to keep a separate branch, then
> probably you will have more luck with developing other operators while you wait
> for this stabilisation, such as POV-Ray importers, and tools.

Thanks for understanding and explanation!

> For instance we
> could use a system of  locked primitives without edit mode and just pov
> parameters, if possible: creating a cube would create a mesh cube, torus the
> same, but the idea would be that at no point you could change the topology, only
> the size, radius, etc. these would be sexy to the blender community because no
> other renderer offers perfectly smooth shapes, except Aqsis and there is to my
> knowledge no Blender interface well taylored specifically for them.

You could see that the early version of my exporter had such opportunity:
object write as... (supertorus, superellipsoid, sphere, cone)
I kept source code and I will transfer it to the new version.
In the Blender we create mesh simulation, but we broadcast only a matrix, and we
represent object as povray shape

Post a reply to this message

"LanuHum" <Lan### [at] yandexru> wrote:
> "Mr" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> >
> > Yes, I understand, and this time I totally agree with you. that is why I love
> > POV-Ray: maturity.
> >
> > Blender is relatively young. its community sometimes suffered from what we call
> > "jeunisme" in french, the tendancy to believe that what is new is necessarily
> > better. that's why most blenderheads rushed to Mitsuba, Luxrender, Yafaray,
> > Kerkythea, Thea, Octane, Aqsis...  etc, without ever considering to help
> > modernize and integrate POV-Ray, simply because "it is old". LuxRender has had
> > up to 16 enthusiast developers, Cycles is driven almost full time by one of the
> > most professional, skilled an experienced developers available.
> > However four/five years or more after their creations, POV-Ray still offers some
> > functionality unavailable to them (Continue Trace) and has caught up with some
> > of its new candies (Real Time stochastic Rendering) to be fair, POV-Ray still
> > misses some features but these give no other difference in the final result than
> > rendering time (this could be debatable, for the way some features such as
> > spectral rendering would leverage more ressources and help overcome some POV-Ray
> > "crashing points", do show if you try the most extreme refractive caustics
> > scenes in POV-Ray and compare them with LuxRender results at the time of writing
> > this)
> >
> > Because some of the Blender friendly external renderers and their exporters'
> > development kept drying out. The solution chosen was to nest the development of
> > the rendering engine inside the Blender Foundation to harvest all of the
> > community energy and feedback. This DID work, and Cycles development has been
> > blazingly fast and did not die. We could consider that with the manpower used in
> > all of these renderers povray 4 would already be there, but it would be like
> > considering you could put a town in a bottle if only every house was smaller.
> >
> > Probably you are working in an area of blender (the nodes) that is less stable
> > than the rest now, the basic material and render API used to change often too
> > but has now stabilized. Here again, being in official addon repository has
> > helped, because developers helping to propagate their api changes themselves
> > made them hold their horses. If you really want to keep a separate branch, then
> > probably you will have more luck with developing other operators while you wait
> > for this stabilisation, such as POV-Ray importers, and tools.
>
> Thanks for understanding and explanation!
>
> > For instance we
> > could use a system of  locked primitives without edit mode and just pov
> > parameters, if possible: creating a cube would create a mesh cube, torus the
> > same, but the idea would be that at no point you could change the topology, only
> > the size, radius, etc. these would be sexy to the blender community because no
> > other renderer offers perfectly smooth shapes, except Aqsis and there is to my
> > knowledge no Blender interface well taylored specifically for them.
>
> You could see that the early version of my exporter had such opportunity:
> object write as... (supertorus, superellipsoid, sphere, cone)
> I kept source code and I will transfer it to the new version.
> In the Blender we create mesh simulation, but we broadcast only a matrix, and we
> represent object as povray shape

Yes it was a good path to explore, but I think it's important that mesh topolgy
gets locked for these specific object types so that user can't break the system,
right?


Also, I insist, for us to keep the motivation, it's important that we try to do
actual pictures, because that will make at least one user giving the most direct
kind of feedback ;-)

Post a reply to this message

"Mr" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Also, I insist, for us to keep the motivation, it's important that we try to do
> actual pictures, because that will make at least one user giving the most direct
> kind of feedback ;-)

Yes, well. :)

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 04.06.2015 um 23:20 schrieb LanuHum:
> > Work on the project is stopped.
> > The repository is removed.
> > All thanks!
>
> You're abandoning your work? Why?

We continue!
:) :) :)

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'lathe_new.blend.jpg' (241 KB)

Preview of image 'lathe_new.blend.jpg'

On 20-6-2015 23:24, LanuHum wrote:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> Am 04.06.2015 um 23:20 schrieb LanuHum:
>>> Work on the project is stopped.
>>> The repository is removed.
>>> All thanks!
>>
>> You're abandoning your work? Why?
>
> We continue!
> :) :) :)
>

Hurray!!

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 20-6-2015 23:24, LanuHum wrote:
> >
> > We continue!
> > :) :) :)
> >
>
> Hurray!!
>
> --
> Thomas

:)

Perfectly Povray draws a prism from curve bezier!
Blender Internal Render does it inside out!
I surely use it in WIP!

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'prism.blend.jpg' (278 KB)

Preview of image 'prism.blend.jpg'

On 21-6-2015 11:59, LanuHum wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> On 20-6-2015 23:24, LanuHum wrote:
>>>
>>> We continue!
>>> :) :) :)
>>>
>>
>> Hurray!!
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> :)
>
> Perfectly Povray draws a prism from curve bezier!
> Blender Internal Render does it inside out!
> I surely use it in WIP!
>

It makes a beautiful shape.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"LanuHum" <Lan### [at] yandexru> wrote:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> > Am 04.06.2015 um 23:20 schrieb LanuHum:
> > > Work on the project is stopped.
> > > The repository is removed.
> > > All thanks!
> >
> > You're abandoning your work? Why?
>
> We continue!
> :) :) :)

Thank you!

Post a reply to this message

On 21/06/2015 08:06, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 20-6-2015 23:24, LanuHum wrote:
>> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>>> Am 04.06.2015 um 23:20 schrieb LanuHum:
>>>> Work on the project is stopped.
>>>> The repository is removed.
>>>> All thanks!
>>>
>>> You're abandoning your work? Why?
>>
>> We continue!
>> :) :) :)
>>
>
> Hurray!!
>

Hip! Hip! Hooray! (I prefer that spelling and pronunciation :-) )

I am very pleased to hear you are carrying on with your work, LanuHum.

When I can find the time to get back to Raytracing. I will definitely be 
using your exporter. :-D

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

LanuHum wrote on 20/06/2015 23.24:
> We continue!
> :) :) :)
>
Very good, indeed!
;-)
Paolo

Post a reply to this message