Hi,

I was reading about animating on the internet. There people were talking
about "professional render engines". What's wrong with povray? Does it
mis features for creating real movies? Or is it the way you control it?
Or are these people just defending their investments?

Remco Poelstra

Post a reply to this message

its just a render engine - no modelling and very basic animation.  With
animation you need a good tool to help you get the job done.


"Remco Poelstra" <rjp### [at] homenl> wrote in message
news:395419C5.246B9B39@home.nl...
> Hi,
>
> I was reading about animating on the internet. There people were talking
> about "professional render engines". What's wrong with povray? Does it
> mis features for creating real movies? Or is it the way you control it?
> Or are these people just defending their investments?
>
> Remco Poelstra

Post a reply to this message

Okay, so Mo-Ray with Pov-Ray :)

Tim S.

Mike Weber wrote:

> its just a render engine - no modelling and very basic animation.  With
> animation you need a good tool to help you get the job done.
>
> "Remco Poelstra" <rjp### [at] homenl> wrote in message
> news:395419C5.246B9B39@home.nl...
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was reading about animating on the internet. There people were talking
> > about "professional render engines". What's wrong with povray? Does it
> > mis features for creating real movies? Or is it the way you control it?
> > Or are these people just defending their investments?
> >
> > Remco Poelstra

Post a reply to this message

Remco Poelstra wrote:
> I was reading about animating on the internet. There people were talking
> about "professional render engines". What's wrong with povray? Does it
> mis features for creating real movies? Or is it the way you control it?
> Or are these people just defending their investments?

Yes, it misses many things that are necessary in movie production;
however, most 3D packages (includuing hi-end ones) misses such features
too, and only a very few programs are useable for movies.

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

"Fabien Mosen" <fab### [at] skynetbe> wrote in message
news:39543D44.8406DAEB@skynet.be...
| Remco Poelstra wrote:
| > I was reading about animating on the internet. There people were talking
| > about "professional render engines". What's wrong with povray? Does it
| > mis features for creating real movies? Or is it the way you control it?
| > Or are these people just defending their investments?
|
| Yes, it misses many things that are necessary in movie production;
| however, most 3D packages (includuing hi-end ones) misses such features
| too, and only a very few programs are useable for movies.

A ray tracer like POV-Ray isn't used much, if at all, anyhow.  Just scan-line
renderers and such, from what I hear or read anyhow.  Speed is of the essence
even when using high-end hardware equipment.

Bob

Post a reply to this message

> only a very few programs are useable for movies.

That is so true. Every time I read about how they made the latest effects
for X or Y movie, you read, in every one, for example, we used Maya and
"in-house tools". This little phrase you will find everywhere.

Post a reply to this message

> A ray tracer like POV-Ray isn't used much, if at all, anyhow.  Just scan-line
> renderers and such, from what I hear or read anyhow.

From what I understand Lightwave 6 uses a combination of raytracing and
scanline. At least that's what I was lead to believe by the folks in
another newsgroup. I could be wrong though.

-- 
Phil
...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.

Post a reply to this message

if we are talking movies we are most likely talking renderman
prman is a scanline renderer, but bmrt was used for 7 shots in a bugs life 
(needed ray traced reflections)

pov lacks displacement mapping, photon mapping (at least in the offcial 
dist) support for nurbs, no shader support, etc. and its animation control 
isn't geared towards movies at all

pcl### [at] tiacnet (Phil Clute) wrote in <3954E44D.DBA64260@tiac.net>:

>> A ray tracer like POV-Ray isn't used much, if at all, anyhow.  Just
>> scan-line renderers and such, from what I hear or read anyhow.
>
>From what I understand Lightwave 6 uses a combination of raytracing and
>scanline. At least that's what I was lead to believe by the folks in
>another newsgroup. I could be wrong though.
>

Post a reply to this message

"Tony[B]" wrote:
> 
> > only a very few programs are useable for movies.
> 
> That is so true. Every time I read about how they made the latest
> effects for X or Y movie, you read, in every one, for example, we used
> Maya and "in-house tools". This little phrase you will find
> everywhere.

And if you go look at the job offerings for the firms that do heavy
computer graphics work, you'll see a few requests for programmers.
I just went to www.bigidea.com, and it's the case there, even though
they're using Maya.

This is partially due to the inability to anticipate everything a
project might need (when developing the commercially-available tools),
and also the fact that genuine photorealism for all objects is still a
long way off.

Regards,
John
-- 
ICQ: 46085459

Post a reply to this message

Just because POV lacks many features doesn't stop people using it to make
movies.  A group called the Internet Movie Project is doing just that.  You
just have to work a bit harder at it, that's all.

Post a reply to this message