 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 15.11.2016 um 10:36 schrieb Mr:
> I was thinking about the coordinates system this morning in the bus! Telling
> myself it would come up in the discussion:
> Our exporter applies transformation matrices to Blender objects and
> switches them to pov coordinates this makes it comfortable for the user who
> dosen't even have to think about xyz for simple scene drafting visually and can
> keep thinking in pov coordinates system once he exported the scene and tweaks it
> in a text file if necessary,
>
> It does give us more complexity in the development of this exporter. Does it
> slow up our export by a lot?
>
> Anyway if one day one of the two software offered the two coordinates sytems, we
> would strip these lines and see what it changes, but until then we'll have to
> keep adapting.
Well, I've got news for you: POV-Ray has been able to use arbitrary
coordinate systems for ages ;)
For instance, to get a right-handed coordinate system with Z up, simply
specify:
camera {
sky z
up z
right x*ASPECT_RATIO
direction y
...
}
and Bob's a relative of yours.
The slowdown upon both export from Blender and import into POV-Ray
should be negligible, and the slowdown during render is non-existent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 15.11.2016 um 04:51 schrieb Sherry K. Shaw:
> Stephen wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, I am going to spend some more time in Blender. To see what I can
>> break. ;-)
>>
>
> Speaking ex cathedra as a developer here:
>
> ALWAYS the best test of any software. :)
A former colleague of mine was a supernatural magnet for bad luck,
congenital handicaps and a shitty family included. Made him the most
valuable member of our testing team: Sometimes he'd literally just start
up a piece of software and it would crash on him; or just activate a
feature that had been tested over and over by other people with no hitch
and it would fail miserably on him.
He didn't search for bugs. They just came to him like flies to a nice
fresh pile of bovine feces.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/15/2016 12:36 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 15.11.2016 um 09:52 schrieb Stephen:
>> On 11/15/2016 8:01 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> Yes, I know, but I understand that this is embedded in Blender, isn't
>>> it? So, is that not a problem for those not familiar with Blender?
>>
>>
>> I would love to see what LanuHum's translator makes of that last
>> sentence. ;-)
>>
>> The problem with Blender is that it is so big and it takes a lot of time
>> to get to the point where you don't have to think about how to do
>> things. But I can see that it will be worthwhile.
>>
>> And the Z-axis is up. :(
>
> Does it at least have a right-handed coordinate system?
>
I don't know, I am past caring and I am not superstitious. I just like
the Z axis to be the depth buffer. The way it is with oscilloscopes.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/15/2016 9:36 AM, Mr wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aol com> wrote:
>> On 11/15/2016 8:01 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> Yes, I know, but I understand that this is embedded in Blender, isn't
>>> it? So, is that not a problem for those not familiar with Blender?
>>
>>
>> I would love to see what LanuHum's translator makes of that last
>> sentence. ;-)
>>
>> The problem with Blender is that it is so big and it takes a lot of time
>> to get to the point where you don't have to think about how to do
>> things. But I can see that it will be worthwhile.
>>
>> And the Z-axis is up. :(
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards
>> Stephen
>
> I was thinking about the coordinates system this morning in the bus! Telling
> myself it would come up in the discussion:
> Our exporter applies transformation matrices to Blender objects and
> switches them to pov coordinates this makes it comfortable for the user who
> dosen't even have to think about xyz for simple scene drafting visually and can
> keep thinking in pov coordinates system once he exported the scene and tweaks it
> in a text file if necessary,
>
I have a question or two and a blend scene that does not export. How do
you want them reported?
If no one objects The Moray groups could be used. They were for Bishop3d.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I hate the
>> imprecision of most 3d software I have tried. I suppose I have some
>> degree
>> of OCD going on because that imprecision bothers the heck out of me.
>>
>
> I have a Big Giant Truckload of OCD going on and that imprecision is
> _precisely_ what bothers me.
Sounds like you two would be better off with a CAD modeller rather than
a mesh-based modeller. Draw what you like, but then you can
constrain/dimension features, either with precise numerical values or
equations/scripts.
For example, it's quite common to have a generic model of a screw, with
parameters for length and diameter. The model is created in such a way
that just changing those two parameters updates the model instantly.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Sherry K. Shaw" <ten### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>
> >
> > Well, I am going to spend some more time in Blender. To see what I can
> > break. ;-)
> >
>
> Speaking ex cathedra as a developer here:
>
> ALWAYS the best test of any software. :)
>
> --Sherry Shaw
>
> --
> #macro T(E,N)sphere{x,.4rotate z*E*60translate y*N pigment{wrinkles scale
> .3}finish{ambient 1}}#end#local I=0;#while(I<5)T(I,1)T(1-I,-1)#local I=I+
> 1;#end camera{location-5*z}plane{z,37 pigment{granite color_map{[.7rgb 0]
> [1rgb 1]}}finish{ambient 2}}// TenMoons
We must not forget that Mr and I do not suggest you abandon the tradition.
Using Blender, you can connect your handwritten codes in the overall scene.
Also, on the contrary, you can write your hands onstage and play the file you
created in Blender. We are expanding the opportunities are not limited to one.
:)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> >> I hate the
> >> imprecision of most 3d software I have tried. I suppose I have some
> >> degree
> >> of OCD going on because that imprecision bothers the heck out of me.
> >>
> >
> > I have a Big Giant Truckload of OCD going on and that imprecision is
> > _precisely_ what bothers me.
>
> Sounds like you two would be better off with a CAD modeller rather than
> a mesh-based modeller. Draw what you like, but then you can
> constrain/dimension features, either with precise numerical values or
> equations/scripts.
>
> For example, it's quite common to have a generic model of a screw, with
> parameters for length and diameter. The model is created in such a way
> that just changing those two parameters updates the model instantly.
We can do an instant update. This is where Povray-users will use Blender. :))))
Superellipsoid, supertorus and so on...
> Stephen wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, I am going to spend some more time in Blender. To see what I can
>> break. ;-)
You could ask me and Mr...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
> Maybe someone should get involved with Blender UI development, and
> implement an alternative UI for noobs, exposing only a subset of the
> features, to give new users some guidance what features they really
> need. Wings 3D does that (or at least did when I last used it), and I
> really liked it.
This could be a continuation of my idea. I chose the fox-toolkit, because it is
the fastest and has the support of opengl. The examples in the source code shows
how to select objects, move them. Start there, but I'm a bad student at school C
++.
:)))
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 15.11.2016 um 10:01 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> > On 15-11-2016 9:52, Stephen wrote:
> >> On 11/15/2016 8:01 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> >>> Yes, I know, but I understand that this is embedded in Blender, isn't
> >>> it? So, is that not a problem for those not familiar with Blender?
> >>
> >>
> >> I would love to see what LanuHum's translator makes of that last
> >> sentence. ;-)
> >
> > Oh dear, yes, I am sorry for that! ;-)
> >
> >>
> >> The problem with Blender is that it is so big and it takes a lot of time
> >> to get to the point where you don't have to think about how to do
> >> things. But I can see that it will be worthwhile.
> >>
> >> And the Z-axis is up. :(
> >>
> >
> > My own thoughts were originally going towards a dedicated tool,
> > specifically built for POV-Ray, like Moray was. I am starting to realise
> > that that may not be the smart way to go at all. As has been mentioned
> > here, Blender might be the solution. However like you, I am afraid it
> > may represent a serious hurdle to take before even reaching the POV-Ray
> > application.
>
> Maybe someone should get involved with Blender UI development, and
> implement an alternative UI for noobs, exposing only a subset of the
> features, to give new users some guidance what features they really
> need. Wings 3D does that (or at least did when I last used it), and I
> really liked it.
Ok! I can do that for POV users !
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>>> I hate the
>>>> imprecision of most 3d software I have tried. I suppose I have some
>>>> degree
>>>> of OCD going on because that imprecision bothers the heck out of me.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have a Big Giant Truckload of OCD going on and that imprecision is
>>> _precisely_ what bothers me.
>>
>> Sounds like you two would be better off with a CAD modeller rather than
>> a mesh-based modeller. Draw what you like, but then you can
>> constrain/dimension features, either with precise numerical values or
>> equations/scripts.
>>
>> For example, it's quite common to have a generic model of a screw, with
>> parameters for length and diameter. The model is created in such a way
>> that just changing those two parameters updates the model instantly.
>
> We can do an instant update. This is where Povray-users will use Blender. :))))
> Superellipsoid, supertorus and so on...
It's just a shame you would be forced to use the Blender UI to access
such things... Maybe the developers have seen sense since last time I
used it? I will need to check it out again at some point.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
