POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.general : silly features Server Time
5 Nov 2024 09:23:06 EST (-0500)
  silly features (Message 1 to 10 of 41)  
Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 10 Messages >>>
From: Remco de Korte
Subject: silly features
Date: 8 Jun 1999 07:27:08
Message: <375CFE92.F4F027F2@xs4all.nl>
I did it before and I'll do it again: suggest a new feature which will probably
be seen as silly and redundant. Anyway, I think it would be really "cool" if you
had the possibility to define by which lightsources an object is lit. So, for
instance, in a scene you have four light_sources lighting the scene, but one
"ghostly" object is only lit by one. This would mean you'd have to name the
lightsource (optional) and add an (optional) statement to an object like
"lit_by" or something.
I realize there are ways (especially with postprocessing) to do this already,
but I haven't found a convincing way yet. At this moment I could use such an
option, but seeing that I don't know how to get this effect I'll have to drop
it. Unless someone enlightens me... (tough luck ;-) )

Regards,

Remco


Post a reply to this message

From: Alexander Enzmann
Subject: Re: silly features
Date: 8 Jun 1999 07:31:58
Message: <375CFECF.27615AF1@mitre.org>
Remco de Korte wrote:
> 
> I did it before and I'll do it again: suggest a new feature which will probably
> be seen as silly and redundant. Anyway, I think it would be really "cool" if you
> had the possibility to define by which lightsources an object is lit...

Not a silly feature.  RenderMan spec requires it.  3DS Max has it.

Xander


Post a reply to this message

From: Nieminen Mika
Subject: Re: silly features
Date: 8 Jun 1999 08:52:26
Message: <375d120a@news.povray.org>
Yeah, interesting.

light_source { ... }

object // Lit by the global light source
{ MyObject1
}

object // Lit by the global light source and an own light source
{ MyObject2
  lit_by { light_source { ... } }
}

object // Lit only by its own light source
{ MyObject3
  no_lights
  lit_by { light_source { ... } }
}

object // Lit by nothing
{ MyObject4
  no_lights
}

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/


Post a reply to this message

From: Lance Birch
Subject: Re: silly features
Date: 8 Jun 1999 09:04:20
Message: <375d14d4@news.povray.org>
I was about to say it was supported by MAX.  In fact I see this feature as
totally invaluable now.  I don't think I could make a scene without using
it...

It's really useful for adding little highlights on certain objects or just
brightening a certain area.  Especially when used with spotlights.

I think it would be great if this was implimented into POV-Ray.

--
Lance.


---
For the latest 3D Studio MAX plug-ins, images and much more, go to:
The Zone - http://come.to/the.zone
For a totally different experience, visit my Chroma Key Website:
Colorblind - http://listen.to/colorblind

Alexander Enzmann wrote in message <375CFECF.27615AF1@mitre.org>...
>
>
>Remco de Korte wrote:
>>
>> I did it before and I'll do it again: suggest a new feature which will
probably
>> be seen as silly and redundant. Anyway, I think it would be really "cool"
if you
>> had the possibility to define by which lightsources an object is lit...
>
>Not a silly feature.  RenderMan spec requires it.  3DS Max has it.
>
>Xander


Post a reply to this message

From: Peter Popov
Subject: Re: silly features
Date: 8 Jun 1999 09:58:24
Message: <375d2067.3805549@news.povray.org>
On Tue, 08 Jun 1999 13:29:22 +0200, Remco de Korte
<rem### [at] xs4allnl> wrote:

>I did it before and I'll do it again: suggest a new feature which will probably
>be seen as silly and redundant. Anyway, I think it would be really "cool" if you
>had the possibility to define by which lightsources an object is lit. So, for
>instance, in a scene you have four light_sources lighting the scene, but one
>"ghostly" object is only lit by one. This would mean you'd have to name the
>lightsource (optional) and add an (optional) statement to an object like
>"lit_by" or something.
>I realize there are ways (especially with postprocessing) to do this already,
>but I haven't found a convincing way yet. At this moment I could use such an
>option, but seeing that I don't know how to get this effect I'll have to drop
>it. Unless someone enlightens me... (tough luck ;-) )
>
>Regards,
>
>Remco

This would be really useful and there have been many occasions that I
wished there were such features in POV.
Implementation, anyone? For free, going once... for free, going
twice... sold!... for free :)


Peter Popov
ICQ: 15002700


Post a reply to this message

From: Bob
Subject: Re: silly features
Date: 8 Jun 1999 10:13:32
Message: <375D24EF.55D81F2D@aol.com>
Doesn't sound "silly" to me either. Do you know about using negative color lights btw?
Not nearly the same thing but you can counter the positive color lights with one. It's
just that this would effect the whole unlit area, not a object alone. Closest you
could
get to your "feature" would be to point a narrow spotlight with color rgb -1 for
example
at the desired object from the exact same location as the positive lightsource.


Remco de Korte wrote:
> 
> I did it before and I'll do it again: suggest a new feature which will probably
> be seen as silly and redundant. Anyway, I think it would be really "cool" if you
> had the possibility to define by which lightsources an object is lit. So, for
> instance, in a scene you have four light_sources lighting the scene, but one
> "ghostly" object is only lit by one. This would mean you'd have to name the
> lightsource (optional) and add an (optional) statement to an object like
> "lit_by" or something.
> I realize there are ways (especially with postprocessing) to do this already,
> but I haven't found a convincing way yet. At this moment I could use such an
> option, but seeing that I don't know how to get this effect I'll have to drop
> it. Unless someone enlightens me... (tough luck ;-) )
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Remco

-- 
 omniVERSE: beyond the universe
  http://members.aol.com/inversez/homepage.htm
 mailto://inversez@aol.com?Subject=PoV-News


Post a reply to this message

From: Ken
Subject: Re: silly features
Date: 8 Jun 1999 10:40:37
Message: <375D2858.B7B025C@pacbell.net>
This thread, the recent thread for a new pattern by Peter Popov, another
new feature suggested in the programming group, plus the large list a while
back just reinforces my feeling that a new group should be formed expressly
for the purpose of discussing new features or modifications to existing
features. There is no way the Pov team could be expected to comb through
all of the messages here when it comes time to start looking for new ideas
for the program and there are suggestions made that may help them decide
which way to best implement something they are already thinking about adding.
  I can't help thinking that many of these wonderful are never added to
the Pov teams list of possible things to do simply because they never hear
about them. A single repository for the digesting of these ideas would
certainly help in this regard.


-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net


Post a reply to this message

From: Jerry Anning
Subject: Re: silly features
Date: 8 Jun 1999 11:39:33
Message: <375d38e9.7735599@news.povray.org>
On Tue, 08 Jun 1999 13:29:22 +0200, Remco de Korte
<rem### [at] xs4allnl> wrote:

>Anyway, I think it would be really "cool" if you
>had the possibility to define by which lightsources an object is lit. So, for
>instance, in a scene you have four light_sources lighting the scene, but one
>"ghostly" object is only lit by one. This would mean you'd have to name the
>lightsource (optional) and add an (optional) statement to an object like
>"lit_by" or something.

See the "light groups" feature (by Mathew Corey Brown) in the upcoming
version of the Superpatch

Jerry Anning
clem "at" dhol "dot" com


Post a reply to this message

From: Ron Parker
Subject: Re: silly features
Date: 8 Jun 1999 11:42:54
Message: <375d39fe@news.povray.org>
On Tue, 08 Jun 1999 13:56:45 GMT, Peter Popov wrote:
>This would be really useful and there have been many occasions that I
>wished there were such features in POV.
>Implementation, anyone? For free, going once... for free, going
>twice... sold!... for free :)

Already implemented in the next superpatch, thanks to Matthew Corey
Brown (xenoarch).  But don't ask me when you can have it. :)


Post a reply to this message

From: Ken
Subject: Re: silly features
Date: 8 Jun 1999 11:52:45
Message: <375D3934.9636B8C8@pacbell.net>
Ron Parker wrote:
> 
> Already implemented in the next superpatch, thanks to Matthew Corey
> Brown (xenoarch).  But don't ask me when you can have it. :)

When can I have it ?

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net


Post a reply to this message

Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 10 Messages >>>

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.