 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Billions of glass cylinders? Stop dreaming :)
>
> Well, perhaps if you have a render farm consisting of hundreds of Cray T3E
> computers with 2048 processors each and gigabytes of memory and running a
> multithreaded patch of povray...
Yes it seems impossible (with povray), but here come the Optimisation (might
need bachelor degree in computer science to achieve this...) it will ONLY
render glass cylinders! It won't be annoyed by anything else that would slow
the render...
IMHO,
Sin
--
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Simon Lemieux | http://www.666Mhz.net |
| lem### [at] yahoo com | POV-Ray, OpenGL, C++ and more... |
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Simon Lemieux <lem### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
: Yes it seems impossible (with povray), but here come the Optimisation (might
: need bachelor degree in computer science to achieve this...) it will ONLY
: render glass cylinders! It won't be annoyed by anything else that would slow
: the render...
If you really want to raytrace billions of glass cylinders, it will take
ages, no matter how optimized it is.
If you want it faster, you have to use some other algorithm than raytracing.
(I don't know if there's any.)
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> If you want it faster, you have to use some other algorithm than raytracing.
> (I don't know if there's any.)
I would suggest photography, but then you would need billions of glass cylinders
;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I would suggest photography, but then you would need billions of glass cylinders
> ;-)
Yeah I thought about this.... but the problem here is not much the money... but
the cash, to buy the lens for my camera, etc...
;)
Simon
--
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Simon Lemieux | http://www.666Mhz.net |
| lem### [at] yahoocom | POV-Ray, OpenGL, C++ and more... |
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I would suggest waiting for quantum computers to become more readily available
(I'm assuming that they already exist but not in the public domain yet).
It would be an interesting exercise to start coding a raytracer for a quantum
computer - I know that algorithms already exist for factoring large numbers which
is likely to be used for cracking so called unbreakable encryption.
Simon Lemieux wrote:
> > Billions of glass cylinders? Stop dreaming :)
> >
> > Well, perhaps if you have a render farm consisting of hundreds of Cray T3E
> > computers with 2048 processors each and gigabytes of memory and running a
> > multithreaded patch of povray...
>
> Yes it seems impossible (with povray), but here come the Optimisation (might
> need bachelor degree in computer science to achieve this...) it will ONLY
> render glass cylinders! It won't be annoyed by anything else that would slow
> the render...
>
> IMHO,
> Sin
>
> --
> +-------------------------+----------------------------------+
> | Simon Lemieux | http://www.666Mhz.net |
> | lem### [at] yahoocom | POV-Ray, OpenGL, C++ and more... |
> +-------------------------+----------------------------------+
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <39A55274.77E3CFDE@hotmail.removethisbit.com>,
ric### [at] hotmailremovethisbitcom says...
> I would suggest waiting for quantum computers to become more readily available
> (I'm assuming that they already exist but not in the public domain yet).
Yes. The "biggest" they build so far was assembled of 3 atoms oder so ;-)
> computer - I know that algorithms already exist for factoring large numbers which
> is likely to be used for cracking so called unbreakable encryption.
Of course thay exists. They only have the small flaw that they would take
at least a few centuries to decrypt a single message.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
