 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Timothy R. Cook" wrote:
> It seems to me I read somewhere that merges were faster...?!
http://www.students.tut.fi/~warp/povQandT/miscQandT.html#csgspeed
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002 21:36:41 GMT, Erk### [at] povray org (Erkki
>Difference is a tricky construction to autobound tightly, there's that
>nasty INVERSE keyword involved. In general a difference can't be
>bounded internally at lower levels than the whole object, if a ray
>hits the 'outer' object all 'inner' objects will have to be evaluated.
>As the number of 'inner' objects increase the total evaluation cost
>increases as well.
I've often thought about a possible remedy of the situation and the
only thing I've come up with is the following:
Imagine the scene space split into 27 subspaces by the 6 planes that
define an object's bounding slab. The central subspace is finite and
the others are infinite but have some defined boundaries. When
calculating the bounding slabs for a difference, there will be 26
slabs (at most) in the hierarchy and not 1, but it could be faster
than no bounding at all (for the internal objects).
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> *listens to the thud of all of the readers of this message
> as they hit the floor after having a sudden heart attack*
Don't worry, at least - I - didn't get a heart attack.. I doubt anyone did..
Well, what you're doing looks fine, but DO change merge to union and I think
you'll be surprised of the speed gain. :o) As I don't know how Moray
works, I can't say if the code will then be fully optimised, but anyway!!
Regards,
Hugo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hugo wrote:
> Well, what you're doing looks fine, but DO change merge to union
> and I think you'll be surprised of the speed gain. :o)
Did, and did. 11 minutes with lights added as opposed to 2 hours
without...
Is it a bad thing if you're only 1% done with a render after 10
hours? Only thing is, it looks SO cool! (see povray.images for
current state of it)
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Is it a bad thing if you're only 1% done with a render after 10
> hours? Only thing is, it looks SO cool! (see povray.images for
> current state of it)
It does look cool! ...mmhmm 10 hours ... I am without words...
Hugo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
