 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 19-1-2019 12:00, And wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
>> On 18-1-2019 15:27, And wrote:
>>> //#declare trunk_13=
>>> #declare PR_DIFFUSE=pigment {color rgb <0.056,0.058,0.036> transmit 0/100 }
>>>
>>>
>>> #declare F1=finish{
>>> diffuse 1
>>> oren_nayar 1.117
>>> }
>>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> oren_nayar? I suppose that is a macro you wrote yourself based on this
>> reflectance model? It does not seem to be mentioned in the POV-Ray docs...
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> new feature of 3.7.? The newest uberpov has this feature, too.
>
Not in 3.7, nor in 3.8 alpha. So, must be UberPOV.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> Not in 3.7, nor in 3.8 alpha. So, must be UberPOV.
>
> --
> Thomas
No, a while back I recall clipka experimenting with using different reflection
models
Mostly since I spent some time trying to understand what went into it.
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3Cweb.57cb6721f854a3db5e7df57c0@news.povray.org%3E/
So, it is/was actual POV-Ray:
http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3C57040752@news.povray.org%3E/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>
> > Not in 3.7, nor in 3.8 alpha. So, must be UberPOV.
> >
>
> ...it is/was actual POV-Ray:
>
> http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3C57040752@news.povray.org%3E/
I just read (or re-read?) that older post; fascinating.
So I tried using the oren_nayer feature in one of the recent 3.8 alphas, but
it's not recognized. I guess it never made it into 3.8's development? Pity that;
the feature sounds quite interesting.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>
> So I tried using the oren_nayer feature in one of the recent 3.8 alphas...
I meant oren_nayar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 19.01.2019 um 18:13 schrieb Kenneth:
> So I tried using the oren_nayer feature in one of the recent 3.8 alphas, but
> it's not recognized. I guess it never made it into 3.8's development? Pity that;
> the feature sounds quite interesting.
The problem was that the `albedo` mode of operation is poorly defined
for oren-nayar and the other one (I think it was minnaert, would have to
look it up), and I haven't made up my mind yet how to solve this.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 19.01.2019 um 18:13 schrieb Kenneth:
>
> > So I tried using the oren_nayer feature in one of the recent 3.8 alphas, but
> > it's not recognized. I guess it never made it into 3.8's development? Pity that;
> > the feature sounds quite interesting.
>
> The problem was that the `albedo` mode of operation is poorly defined
> for oren-nayar and the other one (I think it was minnaert, would have to
> look it up), and I haven't made up my mind yet how to solve this.
?! I think the problem for oren nayar model is solved in previous:
http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3C57040752@news.povray.org%3E/
with the total reflection light counted.
And the appearance of the rendered image with oren-nayar surface convinces me...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 20.01.2019 um 06:43 schrieb And:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> Am 19.01.2019 um 18:13 schrieb Kenneth:
>>
>>> So I tried using the oren_nayer feature in one of the recent 3.8 alphas, but
>>> it's not recognized. I guess it never made it into 3.8's development? Pity that;
>>> the feature sounds quite interesting.
>>
>> The problem was that the `albedo` mode of operation is poorly defined
>> for oren-nayar and the other one (I think it was minnaert, would have to
>> look it up), and I haven't made up my mind yet how to solve this.
>
>
> ?! I think the problem for oren nayar model is solved in previous:
> http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3C57040752@news.povray.org%3E/
>
> with the total reflection light counted.
> And the appearance of the rendered image with oren-nayar surface convinces me...
Thanks for the reminder. Goes to show that my memory is getting a bit leaky.
I'm pretty sure that /something/ was still bothering me though. After
having had a closer look, I'm coming to the conclusion that it was the
interaction with the finish-level `fresnel` keyword.
Nevermind, it seems like I need to get that branch rolling again.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 20-1-2019 7:20, clipka wrote:
> Nevermind, it seems like I need to get that branch rolling again.
That would be nice indeed. I just totally forgot about its existence.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 20.01.2019 um 09:13 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> On 20-1-2019 7:20, clipka wrote:
>> Nevermind, it seems like I need to get that branch rolling again.
>
> That would be nice indeed. I just totally forgot about its existence.
You may want to read my recent post "Experimental features branch" on
`povray.beta-test` if you haven't already...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22-1-2019 15:09, clipka wrote:
> Am 20.01.2019 um 09:13 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> On 20-1-2019 7:20, clipka wrote:
>>> Nevermind, it seems like I need to get that branch rolling again.
>>
>> That would be nice indeed. I just totally forgot about its existence.
>
> You may want to read my recent post "Experimental features branch" on
> `povray.beta-test` if you haven't already...
Yes, I read it and intend to download that, thank you indeed.
[note to self: Got to be careful with all those different branches
without messing up...] ;_)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
