 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Jul 1999 20:19:35 +0300, Margus Ramst <mar### [at] peak eduee>
wrote:
>I've tried to model smoke with multiple containers (not that many, a few 1000s)
>but it was pretty slow. A particle system might need many more. I have doubts
>about the speed of this method. Perhaps you can give a few stats?
>
>Margus
Preliminary tests show that multiple particles is faster than multiple
media, and with better quality. For 100 particles render times were
like 2 vs. 5 minutes. Of course there's the problem with the high
max_trace_level and max_intersections that you might need...
I'll post more precise stats, test code, example images/anim tomorrow
(gimme some time to trace them)
Peter Popov
ICQ: 15002700
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I especially liked City Richmond. You going to remain at geocities
despite the TOS there Robert B. (and Chris C. too)?
As was said a person can certainly make ones own customizations to C.C.s
CityGenerator Include, not a deadend sort of thing in the least.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2 Jul 1999 01:20:16 -0400, Nieminen Mika <war### [at] cctutfi> wrote:
>Matthew Bennett <ben### [at] btinternetcom> wrote:
>: I would hardly have called him a show-off, more like someone with the skill,
>: imagination and generosity of provide his good quality and often unique
>: include files to the public. Though who knows...
>
> I think that the (pov)world would not be the same anymore without Chris'
>include files. It would be a whole lot more boring...
>
I'd probably be absent too (so that might be one benefit). After all,
a good 90% of almost all of my images are probably actually Chris's
work!
Cheers,
Cliff Bowman
Why not pay my 3D Dr Who site a visit at http://www.who3d.cwc.net/
PS change ".duffcom" to ".net" if replying via e-mail
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 03 Jul 1999 00:41:32 +1000, Chris Colefax
<cco### [at] ledanetcomau> wrote:
[snip]
Good post, you even managed to avoid retaliating on an offended and/or
offensive manner. Remarkably "adult" for Usenet these days.
>Oh well, what with this and the current Yahoo-GeoCities furore it's
>probably best I pack up my files and retire under a rock somewhere...
I know you're joking, if only because you know POV users worldwide
would hunt you down like a dog.. I can almost hear the torch-carrying
villagers now "Upload Colefax - this is your last chance!" <g>
>(not bloody likely!) But thanks anyway for keeping me on my toes - now
>I'll just have to work on something to really show off!
Hehehe. Bet you can't beat what you've given us so far into a cocked
hat <how do I do a grin THAT wide?>
Cheers,
Cliff Bowman
Why not pay my 3D Dr Who site a visit at http://www.who3d.cwc.net/
PS change ".duffcom" to ".net" if replying via e-mail
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I (somewhat impetuously) wrote:
> I'll just have to work on something to really show off!
to which Margus Ramst replied:
> I can hardly wait. Keep showing off! The more, the better :)
and Cliff Bowman generously wrote:
> Good post, you even managed to avoid retaliating on an offended and/or
> offensive manner. Remarkably "adult" for Usenet these days.
>
> I know you're joking, if only because you know POV users worldwide
> would hunt you down like a dog.. I can almost hear the torch-carrying
> villagers now "Upload Colefax - this is your last chance!" <g>
>
> Hehehe. Bet you can't beat what you've given us so far into a cocked
> hat <how do I do a grin THAT wide?>
Thank you, Margus and Cliff - to be honest, my first response to
Matthias' post was a wide smile of my own...but being ever poised for a
fall, I couldn't resist a reply! (although the comparison to a hunted
dog is rather disturbing, Cliff...trust an Englishman, what!)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lance Birch wrote:
>
> Now back to on topic stuff here... I was looking through your includes
> libraries etc etc and noticed something about particles systems. I was
> thinking... have you thought about making a particle media system based on
> combining the particle systems you currently have with spheres of media for
> the particles? I talked to Peter Popov about this a while ago and
> unfortunately haven't had the time to get the spcifications to him (sorry
> Peter), but MAX has a really good system based on this... My question is, do
> you think this would be too slow in POV-Ray?
to which Peter Popov replied:
>
> It could be rendered really fast, in fact, if POV's media didn't mess
> up with intersecting container objects that much. I'll try to make a
> speed (and quality) comparison test using 1000 media in one container
> vs. 1000 separate containers... guess which one'll be faster. If the
> latter works, the particle system might as well be done. BTW this is
> one of the major items on my to-do list for this vacation (after July
> 15), as long as a .df3 creating utility and a fractal patch for POV
> (anyone working on any of those?)
>
> And Chris, I have had some thoughts about this particle system that I
> haven't discussed with Lance (sorry, Lance). If you consider the
> project worthy we might as well share some ideas.
My plans for the POV-Ray Particle System certainly include media-related
features. In fact, it is possible to create media-filled particles
using the Liquid Spray include file (as others have already done for
volcanoes, etc.), but while blob containers aren't such a problem they
do not allow for blending individual interiors/media.
One solution, then, might be to create a single blob container which is
filled with multiple media (the centres of the media being located at
the centres of the blob components). This might improve sampling
results, as the container will be more closely fitted to the size of the
media, and of course you don't have the worry of excessive
max_trace_level's. Another option might be to exploit the density
files mentioned - it should be quite possible to output a *.df3 file
based on particle positions/densities, etc., and then (in the same
scene) read this in to create the media.
Of course, if either you, Lance, or you, Peter, (or indeed you,
as-yet-unnamed reader!) wish to regale me with particle system ideas I
am contactable at mailto:cco### [at] geocitiescom (although, No, I haven't
made up my mind about the Yahoo TOS...). As I may have mentioned it's
not always possible for me to gain access to news.povray.org, so a reply
may be quicker forthcoming if the message is also directed more squarely
in my direction.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Colefax <cco### [at] ledanetcomau> wrote:
: Oh well, what with this and the current Yahoo-GeoCities furore it's
: probably best I pack up my files and retire under a rock somewhere...
Don't you dare!
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Colefax wrote:
>I (somewhat impetuously) wrote:
>> I'll just have to work on something to really show off!
>
>to which Margus Ramst replied:
>> I can hardly wait. Keep showing off! The more, the better :)
>
>and Cliff Bowman generously wrote:
>> Good post, you even managed to avoid retaliating on an offended and/or
>> offensive manner. Remarkably "adult" for Usenet these days.
>>
>> I know you're joking, if only because you know POV users worldwide
>> would hunt you down like a dog.. I can almost hear the torch-carrying
>> villagers now "Upload Colefax - this is your last chance!" <g>
>>
[snip]
>Thank you, Margus and Cliff - to be honest, my first response to
>Matthias' post was a wide smile of my own...but being ever poised for a
>fall, I couldn't resist a reply! (although the comparison to a hunted
>dog is rather disturbing, Cliff...trust an Englishman, what!)
>
We're certainly on the odd side over here. Our mental hospitals have
the sane people on the inside with the "inmates" wandering the
countryside. We're happier like that overall :)
Back on to topic (or at least a closer approach) it's disheartening to
see something criticised not for a flaw in it but a lack of
understanding. I suspect there are enough people around who've
benefitted from your work that the misconceptions about your include
files "limitations" wouldn't have stood for long.
BTW I finally got an animation I mentioned by e-mail oh - probably a
couple of years ago - into a state where I'm not too embarrased with
it. Although I'm trying out media instead of your lens flare (a recent
modification which I'm still working on) the "title sequence" still
uses your stars, your explosion to blow up out moon, and your clock
modifier all over the place. Saved me hours and hours of time.
Cheers mate :)
Cheers,
Cliff Bowman
Why not pay my 3D Dr Who site a visit at http://www.who3d.cwc.net/
PS change ".duffcom" to ".net" if replying via e-mail
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Cliff,
Deinstitutionalisationism is rife here in the colonies as well - but
it's surely a testament to the English character that you can still
laugh about it!
And yes, of course I would love to see your animation: do let me know
when it's available on the web, or to organize sending it (and I'll do
my best to desist from any 'jolly good show, chaps'!).
Yours,
Chris.
---------------
>
> We're certainly on the odd side over here. Our mental hospitals have
> the sane people on the inside with the "inmates" wandering the
> countryside. We're happier like that overall :)
>
> Back on to topic (or at least a closer approach) it's disheartening to
> see something criticised not for a flaw in it but a lack of
> understanding. I suspect there are enough people around who've
> benefitted from your work that the misconceptions about your include
> files "limitations" wouldn't have stood for long.
>
> BTW I finally got an animation I mentioned by e-mail oh - probably a
> couple of years ago - into a state where I'm not too embarrased with
> it. Although I'm trying out media instead of your lens flare (a recent
> modification which I'm still working on) the "title sequence" still
> uses your stars, your explosion to blow up out moon, and your clock
> modifier all over the place. Saved me hours and hours of time.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris,
>
>Deinstitutionalisationism is rife here in the colonies as well - but
>it's surely a testament to the English character that you can still
>laugh about it!
When I look all around me - it's laugh or cry!
>And yes, of course I would love to see your animation: do let me know
>when it's available on the web, or to organize sending it (and I'll do
>my best to desist from any 'jolly good show, chaps'!).
>
I actually posted a rather naff (too small) copy to p.b.a. (under the
title "Exploding Moon - bang.avi") and there're two copies (the same
and a much larger, better version where you can SEE the stars!) on my
web site.
I've just about finished reworking the media explosion (takes far too
long to render. Seriously considering returning to your lens flare
add-in for the flammable portion as in some ways it looks better and
it's certainly faster. We'll see...).
I've about sorted out my vortex sequence too - although it's hard to
tell given how long it takes to render (I can't design stuff that's as
efficient as your plugins - my stuff takes weeks to render a few
frames <grr>).
Cheers,
Cliff Bowman
Why not pay my 3D Dr Who site a visit at http://www.who3d.cwc.net/
PS change ".duffcom" to ".net" if replying via e-mail
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
