Peter Popov wrote:
> >
> >-Nathan Kopp
> 
 Maybe you
> should incorporate some way to explicitly specify higher concentration
> of the photons where they are needed.
> 
> Peter

light_source{ location  [type modifiers]}

Light Modifiers Available:

Sun, Moon, Star, Candle, Gas_Lamp, Halogen, Halogen_Quartz, Arc_Lamp,
Laser, Sodium_Vapor, Mercury_Vapor, Argon_Gas, Metal_Halide, Zenon,
Neon, Incandescent, Flourecent, Bio_Luminescent, Ultra_Violet,
Infra_Red, Light_Emitting_Semi_Conductor_Junction, Thermo_Nuclear,
and Super_Nova.

Note: The last two entries are difficult to control and are for the more
      advanced users only.

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message

Peter Popov wrote:
> 
> Of course I will! After all, it was because you beat me to it that I
> gave up doing my virtual light sources patch. You mentioned once that
> you implemented faked (not using real wavelengths, of coz) dispersion
> in your patch. That's nice. Now the question is, what amound of
> photons do I have to shoot from the sun so that a reasonable number of
> them passes through a 1 inch wide slit, hits my palm and illuminates
> the room with radiosity, caustics and dispersion at that? Maybe you
> should incorporate some way to explicitly specify higher concentration
> of the photons where they are needed.
> 

Yes.  In fact, all photons are shot at specific objects (at a specified
density for each object) instead of everywhere.

Unfortunately, (at least the first version of) this photon mapping
implementation will not directly impact radiosity.  In other words, if
radiosity wouldn't light up the room from a small highly-ambient spot,
then it won't light up the room from a small photon-lit spot.  Photons
will get the light through the slit, off all the specular-reflective
surfaces, and to your hand, but no further (for now).

Photon mapping will NOT replace radiosity (I thought it would, but I
tried it and it didn't work very well).

-Nathan Kopp

Post a reply to this message

Margus Ramst schrieb in Nachricht <36cf1a2e.0@news.povray.org>...
>
>Rudy Velthuis wrote in message <36cf10c2.0@news.povray.org>...
>>
>>What exactly do you mean by "copyright infringement _again_"?
>>
>I mean _risk_ again. Like putting Mickey Mouse or Coke in your image. If
you
>haven't done so, check out "usage of commercial logos" thread in
>irtc.general.

OIC, I didn't subscribe to irtc.general yet (I'm not good enough to do
anything for the IRTC <sigh>), so I hadn't heard about copyright problems.
Thanks for the pointer and the explanation.

--
Rudy Velthuis

Post a reply to this message

Nathan Kopp schrieb in Nachricht <36CF1BDD.6F08F75C@Kopp.com>...
>Let me just say that you may want to check out my photon mapping patch once
>I make a public beta available.

WHEN??? It would make raytracing sooo much more realistic. Keep up the good
work!

--
Rudy Velthuis

Post a reply to this message

Metric wrenches on ASA hex nuts, tsk! tsk!
I am in no way affiliated with or endorse any and all products which are
not of my own property, and even then...


Ken wrote:
> 
> Bob Hughes wrote:
> 
> > And, hey, I'm both American and *semi*-metric, if that counts for anything.
> 
> I got a set of them "metric" wrenches once. That metric company needs
> to improve their product. The darn things were just too sloppy and
> rounded the corners on the hex nuts. Your not assiociated with them
> by any chance are you ? I want my money back !
> 
> --
> Ken Tyler
> 
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

-- 
 omniVERSE: beyond the universe
  http://members.aol.com/inversez/POVring.htm
 mailto:inv### [at] aolcom?PoV

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 20 Feb 1999 19:45:52 -0800, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:

>Peter Popov wrote:
>> >
>> >-Nathan Kopp
>> 
> Maybe you
>> should incorporate some way to explicitly specify higher concentration
>> of the photons where they are needed.
>> 
>> Peter
>
>light_source{ location  [type modifiers]}
>
>Light Modifiers Available:
>
>Sun, Moon, Star, Candle, Gas_Lamp, Halogen, Halogen_Quartz, Arc_Lamp,
>Laser, Sodium_Vapor, Mercury_Vapor, Argon_Gas, Metal_Halide, Zenon,
>Neon, Incandescent, Flourecent, Bio_Luminescent, Ultra_Violet,
>Infra_Red, Light_Emitting_Semi_Conductor_Junction, Thermo_Nuclear,
>and Super_Nova.
>
>Note: The last two entries are difficult to control and are for the more
>      advanced users only.

RTM, Ken! You've missed Copped_Bromide, Yttrium-Aluminum Granate
(YAG), Carbon Dioxide Plasma (it's got a built-in filter 1.0), and
that one failing any description rather that "Pete's eyes while ogling
a Katmai running POV"

:)

Peter
---------
Peter Popov
ICQ: 15002700

Post a reply to this message

Peter Popov wrote in message <36cd1c53.13142319@news.povray.org>...
>Now the question is, how the heck do I model all that in just a
>lifetime? And how many Cray supercomputers will I need to render it?
>
>Any help appreciated.



I think you'll need a Quantum Computer.  I can't wait 'till they are a
reality -- besides being able to blow away all current encryption
algorithms, they are great for simulation.  In effect, you are harnessing
Nature's CPU directly, the same one that =is= used to compute such a beam of
light interacting with everything else in the room.

--John

Post a reply to this message

I want to make an alpha version (syntax not locked down yet) available in
the first few weeks of March.  The second week of March is spring break
for me, so I should have some time. :-)

-Nathan

Rudy Velthuis wrote:
> 
> Nathan Kopp schrieb in Nachricht <36CF1BDD.6F08F75C@Kopp.com>...
> >Let me just say that you may want to check out my photon mapping patch once
> >I make a public beta available.
> 
> WHEN??? It would make raytracing sooo much more realistic. Keep up the good
> work!
> 
> --
> Rudy Velthuis

Post a reply to this message

Nathan Kopp schrieb in Nachricht <36D### [at] Koppcom>...
>I want to make an alpha version (syntax not locked down yet) available in
>the first few weeks of March.  The second week of March is spring break
>for me, so I should have some time. :-)
>
>-Nathan

I understand your problem. I also wanted to assemble the softtext thingie in
a few days, but it took longer and longer, because this had to be done in my
spare time and I don't live on a deserted island (work, obligations, illness
in the family, etc.). I think your problem is the same.

Anyway, can't wait to test the alpha. Don't care about the syntax, as long
as I can use it. There are many syntax issues in POV-Ray I don't like (too C
oriented <g>), so I don't care about one or two more. I particularly hate
the keywords with an underscore in it (look_at etc.).

--
Rudy Velthuis

Post a reply to this message

Rudy Velthuis wrote:
> 
> Anyway, can't wait to test the alpha. Don't care about the syntax, as long
> as I can use it. There are many syntax issues in POV-Ray I don't like (too C
> oriented <g>), so I don't care about one or two more. I particularly hate
> the keywords with an underscore in it (look_at etc.).
> 

Anyone else out there have any opinions on this... right now I have a lot of
keywords WITH underscores... my reason for this is that the more specific
I make the keyword, the less likely it will be that it conflicts with
somebody's variable name.  You know... now that I think about it, maybe I
should ditch some of those extra-long keywords.  (One of the reasons I
dislike COBOL is the long keywords.)  If somebody wants to use one of my
reserved words for a variable name, too bad.  ;-)

-Nathan

Post a reply to this message