David Wilkinson wrote:
>
> I have just rendered (again) all four of  the examples in scenes\CSG
> and find that they emphasise interesting textures rather than clearly
> showing the way that CSG operations can be used.  This just helps to
> convince me that an objective look at on improving documentation would
> be well worthwhile.


Okay -- there is room for improvement.  But examples of CSG are
spread throughout the examples.  It is perhaps ironic that the
CSG directory may be below average in its use of CSG :).

You are correct that there is a strong emphasis in the examples
of simpler models with more complex texturing.  The "advanced" directory
is fancier, though -- excellent CSG work can be found in the
fish example and the chess example.

Still, these examples are not extremely well organized.  A coherent
framework might prove useful.

I will, however, bow out of this discussion, leaving it to those willing
to volunteer their time and effort to do the work.  I'd rather concentrate
my efforts elsewhere.

Dan

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 27 Dec 1998 14:16:08 GMT, dav### [at] mcmailcom (David
Wilkinson) wrote:

>On Sat, 26 Dec 1998 18:30:55 -0800, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
>With the net, however, we have a great opportunity to set up a group
>who, communally, have all these virtues.  How about an "ego-less"
>documentation group?  A povray.documentation category of this news
>group would be a good start, perhaps split up into the sub-topics Ken
>has listed. 

As a frustrated denizen of povray.programming, I have to say that
.documentation would be a singularly bad name for a group.  Worse
then .programming.  Unless you want to spend all your time answering
questions about the existing docs.

Post a reply to this message

Ronald L. Parker wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 27 Dec 1998 14:16:08 GMT, dav### [at] mcmailcom (David
> Wilkinson) wrote:
> 
> >On Sat, 26 Dec 1998 18:30:55 -0800, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
> >With the net, however, we have a great opportunity to set up a group
> >who, communally, have all these virtues.  How about an "ego-less"
> >documentation group?  A povray.documentation category of this news
> >group would be a good start, perhaps split up into the sub-topics Ken
> >has listed.
> 
> As a frustrated denizen of povray.programming, I have to say that
> .documentation would be a singularly bad name for a group.  Worse
> then .programming.  Unless you want to spend all your time answering
> questions about the existing docs.

  I agree. The two tutorial groups that are already in exsistence
would serve the purposed project well.

-- 
Ken Tyler

tyl### [at] pacbellnet

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:
> 
> Areas I feel need covered:
> 
>  1. Media
>  2. Animation
>  3. Radiosity
>  4. The Texture and Pigment process
>  5. Conditional statments
>  6. What is in and what is out (the Pov surface normal)
>  7. CSG operations - goes with above
>  8. The camera statement - Seems simple now but there was a time ...
>  9. When to use an external program, include file, etc...
> 10. How to convert the output from the above to useful syntax in Pov
> 11. Macros !!!

Late breaking addition to the wish list:

12. Blobs !!!

-- 
Ken Tyler

tyl### [at] pacbellnet

Post a reply to this message

Twyst wrote in message <3681705a.0@news.povray.org>...
>I had a great idea recently...
>
>Do a "User Documentation Project"!
>
>I had the idea while noticing that the Pov-Ray docs, while complete, didn't
>go into much detail in certain cases, and there are people that DO know
>certain aspects very well. (John VanSickle comes to mind....).
>
>It seems to me that much of the manual could do with expanding on topics
>(Media is one example) and tutorials.
>
>So, here's the complete idea:
>1. With the pov-team's permission (please, can we?), rewrite the pov-ray
>docs.
>2. Make it available in a number of formats, from plain text to PDF format.
>3. I would ALSO like to be able to publish a spiral bound volume, and sell
>it at a minimal cost.
>4. I intend for this to be a "group" project. It's a daunting task for a
>single person.




My bad. I forgot to mention that I'm not in this for the money. Any profits
that would come out of this, would A) go to pay for publishing, and B) go to
the pov-team, for stuff like webspace (Don't want another scare, now, do
we?)


Twyst

Post a reply to this message

Twyst wrote:
> My bad. I forgot to mention that I'm not in this for the money. Any profits
> that would come out of this, would A) go to pay for publishing, and B) go to
> the pov-team, for stuff like webspace (Don't want another scare, now, do
> we?)

And perhaps free copies to big contributors?
And even if not, count me in. I'd be happy to help with fact checking,
etc.

Phoenix

--
http://users.telekabel.nl/eagle
----------------------------------------------------------------------
AFP Code 1.1 AC d%40 s%40:-- a- U+ R+ F++ h- P- OS-:%40 C+++ M- pp----
L+ c%40 B- Cn%40 PT+ Pu0@ 5++ X-- MT+ e%40 r- y* end     AFPurity: 78%

Post a reply to this message

Twyst wrote:

>
> ... In others, it's very sparse (Vectors, media, etc,etc)
>

> Also, does anyone here actually use/understand the graphs they give (like
> for the scattering types)

Yup, i'm a physicist.   Such things I understand well in my sleep.   I'd be
happy to explain scattering, quilt patterns, and whatnot in non-math terms,
with plenty of pictures.


> -- Yes, it can be useful, but without a detailed
> explanation ( in layman's terms, not mathematical) It's pretty useless to
> me. I usually just skip right over them.
> Renderings SHOWING the effects of the different settings would be far more
> useful, imho.

An excellent idea.   The official POV docs show a nice series of images to
explain some things, but whoa! is it lacking in others.    For a long time
I've been wanting to make a table of superellipsoid settings and their
results.   I've been too lazy to actually do this, but now, Lance, you have
made the call for this Great Project, so now I will get real about this.

---
Daren Scot Wilson
dar### [at] pipelinecom
www.newcolor.com
"A ship...etc"  (just reinstalled linux, still haven't restored my email
signature file)

Post a reply to this message

Oh dang, I said "Lance" when I meant to say "Twyst" - I should break this bad
habit of having fifteen windows up, reading several threads of newsgroups,
emails, etc. all at the same time..   My poor little brain isn't as
multitasking as I thought...

Daren S. Wilson

Post a reply to this message

Dan Connelly wrote:

>
> Still, these examples are not extremely well organized.  A coherent
> framework might prove useful.

Being a geek, I find it natural to go spelunking through examples and
reference manuals, but even I often get stuck on something and want to
quickly look up the syntax, the correct spelling, etc.   So a
concept-oriented organization would be very useful.   Rending of existing
examples is not enough - a discussion of these examples is needed.  Yet I'd
skip that, as someone learning POV-Ray or an experienced artist needing to
use an unusual feature would want examples tuned to just that concept.
Combining too many concepts in one example makes it hard to distinguish them.

OTOH, this does not mean that every image that illustrates a concept should
be simple.   Example .pov files should be kept simple, but other images that
show specific concepts, for example, how superellipsoid shapes vary with its
parameters, should be made easy for the eyes to take in, and that may mean
using more than simple lighting and textures.

In short, i see the need for different kinds of images  (1) those that are
tutorial examples of POV-Ray coding, which must be kept simple, and (2) Those
that illustrate various concepts, whose .pov source are not to be shown to
the end user (unless they're very curious).

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:

> > Areas I feel need covered:
> >
> >  1. Media
> >  2. Animation
> >  3. Radiosity
> >  4. The Texture and Pigment process
> >  5. Conditional statments
> >  6. What is in and what is out (the Pov surface normal)
> >  7. CSG operations - goes with above
> >  8. The camera statement - Seems simple now but there was a time ...
> >  9. When to use an external program, include file, etc...
> > 10. How to convert the output from the above to useful syntax in Pov
> > 11. Macros !!!
> 12. Blobs !!!

When I first began, I wanted:

* How to organize your .pov file  (there being many ways, of course, but
how hard it was to come up with even just one way!)
* pigments with nozero filter and transmit values - I had some weird
troubles with these, even after one year of use.  (Turned out they were
acting weird due to bugs I had in my old dispersion hacks.)
* A lighting tutorial.  Sure, the existing docs explain the light_source
syntax, but I haven't seen anything anywhere, well, one short web page,
on the artistic aspects of using lights.   Basic photographic lighting
techniques and some theater lighting tips would be so helpful to many
POV-Ray artists.
* Colors - choosing harmonious, pleasant colors comes natural to most
artists, but few can translate them mentally into RGB.  So let's add some
basic color theory, and how to tweak colors in a scene you're almost
happy with.


Daren Scot Wilson
dar### [at] pipelinecom
www.newcolor.com
Still w/o a  real .signature file....so dont' trust the spelling of my
email address.

Post a reply to this message