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

On Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:46:03 -0500, Nathan Kopp <Nat### [at] Koppcom> wrote:
>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.  ;-)

The proper thing to do here is for everyone writing scenes, inc files, etc.
to use at least one capital letter in every variable name.  My personal
patches (as opposed to the ones I've borrowed from various other people)
always have short, common keywords.  

Keeping in mind that all keywords need to be lowercase, then, it seems
that the underscore is the best alternative to BiCaps.

Post a reply to this message

How about giving us the new keywords and a little about what they
control and we could probably come to a consensus?  Either that, or just
think to yourself, if I was just using the program and not writing it,
what would make sense to me.

I think some good examples are the keywords for radiosity.  Like
grey_threshold could just be grey.  100% grey is no color.  Simpler but
makes sense.  I think minimum_reuse could just be reuse.

I agree with Ron that it's customary for reserved keywords to use all
lowercase and user defined terms should start with a Cap.  So be
specific.  People can change variable names that conflict with them;
that's what the message window is for. ;)

-Mike

> 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

Mike wrote:
> 
> How about giving us the new keywords and a little about what they
> control and we could probably come to a consensus?  Either that, or just
> think to yourself, if I was just using the program and not writing it,
> what would make sense to me.
> 
> I think some good examples are the keywords for radiosity.  Like
> grey_threshold could just be grey.  100% grey is no color.  Simpler but
> makes sense.  I think minimum_reuse could just be reuse.
> 
> I agree with Ron that it's customary for reserved keywords to use all
> lowercase and user defined terms should start with a Cap.  So be
> specific.  People can change variable names that conflict with them;
> that's what the message window is for. ;)
> 
> -Mike

What Mike said !

Ken would like to pipe in quickly with a plea for shorter keywords and no
under_scored identifiers. The sooner they are fazed out of exsistence
the better.

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message