>I thought it natural that the camera, as an object, could be included
in a union{}.<
Well, the camera is not an object. Not really, somewhat like the
sky_sphere. You can do some of the same things to it, but that doesn't
make it an object. You can only have one of them, bounding and clipping
are useless, various other things.
Perhaps it should be an object, but then what do you do with multiple
cameras? Give each camera a name attribute, and specify the camera in
global_settings? It does seem a little inconsistant that the camera
isn't an object, but light sources are.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 03 Nov 1999 19:32:30 -0900, mr.art wrote:
>So why not put the camera on an object in a union?
...
>All these things POV does for every object.
>And for the camera. I thought it natural that
>the camera, as an object, could be included in
>a union{}.

You're right, I don't see any reason why it couldn't be, other than
because that's the way it is.  I was commenting on the "POV knows the
transform for every object" assertion, not on the (imho good) idea of
letting cameras be inside unions.

-- 
These are my opinions.  I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
The superpatch: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/superpatch/
My other stuff: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
: You're right, I don't see any reason why it couldn't be, other than
: because that's the way it is.  I was commenting on the "POV knows the
: transform for every object" assertion, not on the (imho good) idea of
: letting cameras be inside unions.

  Thanx to this thread I found something that might be considered a bug.

  It started from the thought that if camera would be allowed to be in a
union, then it could be in any CSG. So what does this mean:

difference { camera { ... } sphere { 0,1 } }

?

  Then I thought: But hey! You can put a light source in a union. What
happens if you put it in a difference?
  I tried it and povray output this:

warning: Patch objects not allowed in intersection.

  Patch object?

-- 
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

On 4 Nov 1999 09:40:45 -0500, Nieminen Juha wrote:
>  Then I thought: But hey! You can put a light source in a union. What
>happens if you put it in a difference?
>  I tried it and povray output this:
>
>warning: Patch objects not allowed in intersection.
>
>  Patch object?

in point.h:
#define LIGHT_OBJECT (COMPOUND_OBJECT+PATCH_OBJECT+LIGHT_SOURCE_OBJECT)

The term "patch object" is probably a bit misleading, but I can't come
up with a better phrase off the top of my head.

-- 
These are my opinions.  I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
The superpatch: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/superpatch/
My other stuff: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html

Post a reply to this message

POV handles camera, as best as I can tell, by using the
last one encountered. The others are discarded in favor
of the last. I ran into that one a few years back and now
use an "active scene workspace" as a work around. Only
the camera that is in the scene that I am using is the last
one encountered.

Chris Huff wrote:

> >I thought it natural that the camera, as an object, could be included
> in a union{}.<
> Perhaps it should be an object, but then what do you do with multiple
> cameras? Give each camera a name attribute, and specify the camera in
> global_settings? It does seem a little inconsistant that the camera
> isn't an object, but light sources are.

Post a reply to this message

"mr.art" <mr.### [at] gcinet> wrote:
> Is it possible to include a camera statement in a union?
> I want to place the camera in the head of a figure, but
> POV gives an error for this.
> I am using POVray 3.1g for Windows.

Camera in a union would be handy in case you want to move the camera and all the
lights at the same time.


Mike

Post a reply to this message

"posfan12" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "mr.art" <mr.### [at] gcinet> wrote:
> > Is it possible to include a camera statement in a union?
> > I want to place the camera in the head of a figure, but
> > POV gives an error for this.
> > I am using POVray 3.1g for Windows.
>
> Camera in a union would be handy in case you want to move the camera and all the
> lights at the same time.
>
>
> Mike

Define camera location and look_at variables, and then define the camera and
everything else based on that one variable.

You can even define that variable right there at the beginning of your union{}
statement.  Then translating the union would move everything just like you want.

Post a reply to this message