 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mick Hazelgrove <mic### [at] mhazelgrove fsnetcouk> wrote:
: I have just stopped my IRTC entry render 2 days into a very long render{12 -
: 48 days!) without thinking I clicked on stop render instead of render
: priority. Oh well. Try again and hope!
Why didn't you just use the command line option +C to continue the render?
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was so shocked at having been so stupid I was even more stupid and just
clicked render again.
Mick
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3991209b@news.povray.org...
> Mick Hazelgrove <mic### [at] mhazelgrovefsnetcouk> wrote:
> : I have just stopped my IRTC entry render 2 days into a very long
render{12 -
> : 48 days!) without thinking I clicked on stop render instead of render
> : priority. Oh well. Try again and hope!
>
> Why didn't you just use the command line option +C to continue the
render?
>
> --
> 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mick Hazelgrove <mic### [at] mhazelgrovefsnetcouk> wrote:
: I was so shocked at having been so stupid I was even more stupid and just
: clicked render again.
Well, we learn from our mistakes :)
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I hope so:)
Mick
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:39916c02@news.povray.org...
> Mick Hazelgrove <mic### [at] mhazelgrovefsnetcouk> wrote:
> : I was so shocked at having been so stupid I was even more stupid and
just
> : clicked render again.
>
> Well, we learn from our mistakes :)
>
> --
> 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <399109b6@news.povray.org>, "Mick Hazelgrove"
<mic### [at] mhazelgrovefsnetcouk> wrote:
> Ken is right - there's no way on earth I could have come up with
> that.
I thought it was pretty basic...just remap the values, and clamp to the
[0, 1] range to produce the plateaus. Isosurface functions were the
natural choice for this, since they can be used as a pattern and have
access to the noise function.
> Thank you Nathan for the help and Chris for the iso suggestion.
> There are other patterns affected by the change, will the same
> function work for them?
Yes and no...you could rebuild the patterns in function form, but it
wouldn't be easy for some. It would be easier to use the pigment_pattern
for these. However, I think bozo/bumps/spotted were the main
problem...the other patterns might work fine.
--
Christopher James Huff - Personal e-mail: chr### [at] maccom
TAG(Technical Assistance Group) e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
Personal Web page: http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG Web page: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3990DBEA.BE182729@pacbell.net>, lin### [at] povrayorg
wrote:
> It looks like something the "average" POV-Ray user would never be
> able to come up with on his/her own.
I just don't understand why not, pattern functions seemed the natural
choice, and the function is quite simple. Maybe it would be more easily
understood this way:
//clamps the value x to the range [y,z]
#declare clamp = function {max(y,min(z,x))}
//old style bozo, complete with plateaus
#declare OldBozo =
function {clamp(noise3d(x,y,z)/0.48985582 - 1.05242 + 0.5, 0, 1)}
Or are you talking about the "noise3d(x,y,z)/0.48985582 - 1.05242 + 0.5"
part? That was just the mapping copied from Nathans post.
--
Christopher James Huff - Personal e-mail: chr### [at] maccom
TAG(Technical Assistance Group) e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
Personal Web page: http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG Web page: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris, many of us gave up maths a long time ago and even then, in my case, I
didn't go much beyond what was then in England "O"levels. I have spent most
of my life as a painter, sculptor and teacher. I have a longing to go back
and try and catch up and when I retire it will be my first act. Until then I
will have to rely on asking you and others for help. Sorry!
Mick
"Chris Huff" <chr### [at] maccom> wrote in message
news:chrishuff-E4E0EF.12124009082000@news.povray.org...
> In article <3990DBEA.BE182729@pacbell.net>, lin### [at] povrayorg
> wrote:
>
> > It looks like something the "average" POV-Ray user would never be
> > able to come up with on his/her own.
>
> I just don't understand why not, pattern functions seemed the natural
> choice, and the function is quite simple. Maybe it would be more easily
> understood this way:
>
>
> file://clamps the value x to the range [y,z]
> #declare clamp = function {max(y,min(z,x))}
>
> file://old style bozo, complete with plateaus
> #declare OldBozo =
> function {clamp(noise3d(x,y,z)/0.48985582 - 1.05242 + 0.5, 0, 1)}
>
> Or are you talking about the "noise3d(x,y,z)/0.48985582 - 1.05242 + 0.5"
> part? That was just the mapping copied from Nathans post.
>
> --
> Christopher James Huff - Personal e-mail: chr### [at] maccom
> TAG(Technical Assistance Group) e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
> Personal Web page: http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
> TAG Web page: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Mick Hazelgrove" <mic### [at] mhazelgrovefsnetcouk> wrote...
> Ken is right - there's no way on earth I could have come up with that.
Thank
> you Nathan for the help and Chris for the iso suggestion. There are other
> patterns affected by the change, will the same function work for them?
I think the only other affected patterns are wrinkles and (maybe) agate
(maybe granite, too, but I don't think so). Those are not so easy to change
(especially using functions), but I think that using the pigment_pattern
approach would probably work.
-Nathan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3994ca8b$1@news.povray.org>, "Nathan Kopp"
<Nat### [at] Koppcom> wrote:
> I think the only other affected patterns are wrinkles and (maybe)
> agate (maybe granite, too, but I don't think so). Those are not so
> easy to change (especially using functions), but I think that using
> the pigment_pattern approach would probably work.
The affected patterns include:
bozo, bumps, spotted, noise3d(), all of which are identical. (well,
noise3d() can be used as a function pattern, and they aren't identical
in normals, though bozo, spotted, and noise3d() should be more useful in
normals now)
dents
agate
crackle(with "solid" on, at least)
granite
wrinkles
And of course, the ridged multifractal functions. In addition, anything
using turbulence will be affected.
However, "affected" can simply mean the image generated by the pattern
will change, the difference is probably not very noticeable most of the
time in the more complex patterns. And there isn't any difference in
actual use.
--
Christopher James Huff - Personal e-mail: chr### [at] maccom
TAG(Technical Assistance Group) e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
Personal Web page: http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG Web page: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nathan Kopp wrote:
> The mapping is (if I did the math correctly):
> old_value = (new_value / 0.48985582) - 1.05242 + 0.5
what is the significance of these numbers?
--
Anton Sherwood -- br0### [at] p0b0xcom -- http://ogre.nu/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
