Hello All,

This is just to remind you that Pov-Ray is very great, moreover
it is free, but don't forget that commercial product are really
really impressive and fast. You can make scene very quickly 
because of the very nice modeler and the rendering time are
really impressive even if you use raytracing and radiosity 
(and for the test you just use scanline so this is very fast).

For those who don't believe me just look the quality of
the images I posted in the images group. This image just
show the quality of the renderer not the modeler. But
anyone know that the modeler of commercial product are
very impressive (just search for site which contain monster
etc.. made with 3ds, there are plenty :)).

Pov-Ray is great this is sure but you don't have the facility 
that you have with commercial soft. So with Pov-Ray you can
sometime create scene which are not simple with commercial
software (you use the properties of scripting) but this is 
rare, and now most of the commercial product have scripting
capabilities so...

Conclusion: Pov-Ray is incredible but only to do some 
particlar things not all things. (everyone know that it 
is impossible to model some particular thing without 
importing mesh). But for rendering quality, the level is closed
to the best commercial one (Mental ray etc...)

Fabian.



> 
> I haven't use 3DSMax yet, so I'm not sure about this...
> but my understanding is that 3DSMax is not actually
> a raytracer.  Supposedly it's something called a
> scanline renderer?  Anyone know the difference?
> Would that account for the difference in rendering
> times between it and POV?
> 
> --
> Doug Eichenberg
> http://www.nls.net/douge
> dou### [at] nlsnet

Post a reply to this message

Fabian BRAU wrote:
> 
[Snip]
> For those who don't believe me just look the quality of
> the images I posted in the images group. This image just
> show the quality of the renderer not the modeler. But
> anyone know that the modeler of commercial product are
> very impressive (just search for site which contain monster
> etc.. made with 3ds, there are plenty :)).
> 
I think that from certain level up there is no difference really, which
engine is used for rendering, it comes more to artistical skill. POV-Ray
has reached this level, so are other commercial applications. For
example of other renderer's output look to this TrueSpace picture:
http://www.caligari.com/gallery/images/images99/october99/winner.html
or 
http://www.caligari.com/gallery/images/images99/october99/image03.html

I'm sure, that such picture could be done in other renderers as well, so
there should be just good idea and it's all up to user. Discussion a la
"XXX renderer's output is not as good as YYY's one" sounds more like
holy war.

Just my 0.02

Post a reply to this message

Lance Birch <-> wrote:
: Read the rules and you'll find otherwise... and besides, MAX has a
: raytracer.

  So if the software HAS a raytracer, although no raytracing is used to
create the image, then it's ok?

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

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> 
> Lance Birch <-> wrote:
> : Read the rules and you'll find otherwise... and besides, MAX has a
> : raytracer.
> 
>   So if the software HAS a raytracer, although no raytracing is used to
> create the image, then it's ok?

 Yes.  You should think of IRTC as a RENDERING competition.  While
it was first aimed at raytracers, the rules clearly states that
ANY 3D rendering process is allowed.
 Even OpenGL rendering will be allowed (though don't expext a high
score !!).

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

Fabien Mosen <fab### [at] skynetbe> wrote:
:  Even OpenGL rendering will be allowed (though don't expext a high
: score !!).

  Why not? Almost any snapshot of Quake3 looks a lot better than most
renderings submitted to the irtc (and Quake3 uses OpenGL).

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

Post a reply to this message

>Conclusion: Pov-Ray is incredible but only to do some
>particlar things not all things. (everyone know that it
>is impossible to model some particular thing without
>importing mesh). But for rendering quality, the level is closed
>to the best commercial one (Mental ray etc...)

well, i've considered povray as a good rendering engine, *not*
as a modeller or an animator.
btw. just wondering why there aren't any povray modellers around.
(at least i haven't seen any)
and i don't mean software which is just trying to emulate some
commercial modelling apps, i mean a *povray* modeller with
integrated modellers (mesh/surface/csg) and made in a way
that you could all the time see the actual code, wireframe
representing it and even edit that code directly and see the
effects of that editing in realtime.

Post a reply to this message

> 
> Fabian BRAU wrote:
> >
> [Snip]
> > For those who don't believe me just look the quality of
> > the images I posted in the images group. This image just
> > show the quality of the renderer not the modeler. But
> > anyone know that the modeler of commercial product are
> > very impressive (just search for site which contain monster
> > etc.. made with 3ds, there are plenty :)).
> >
> I think that from certain level up there is no difference really, which
> engine is used for rendering, it comes more to artistical skill. 

I totally agree :).

Fabian.

Post a reply to this message

Because it's generally thought by the judges that not enough effort was put
in to produce the result.  A little like the way people using Maya and
rendering on Origin 2000 servers are thought to have an unfair advantage.

The IRTC is simply a rendering competition, or so the rules state; you don't
*have* to use a raytracer, you can just use a scanline renderer if you want.

--
Lance

The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone

Post a reply to this message

Lance Birch <-> wrote:
: Because it's generally thought by the judges that not enough effort was put
: in to produce the result.  A little like the way people using Maya and
: rendering on Origin 2000 servers are thought to have an unfair advantage.

  Let me assure you that it's a LOT more difficult to get a good image with
pure OpenGL (without using any modeller) than with povray (without using
any modeller).

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

Post a reply to this message

Fabian BRAU wrote:

>This image just
>show the quality of the renderer not the modeler.

I always wonder, so I ask it here, what are objective (measurable?) 
criteria to determine the quality of a renderer/tracer/.. 


Ingo

-- 
Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
Pov-Ray    : http://members.home.nl/seed7/

Post a reply to this message