 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was just looking at some of the real-time raytracing demos at
http://www.acm.org/tog/resources/RTNews/demos/overview.htm and I was
wondering: why can't POV-Ray be that fast?
cu!
ZK
http://www.povplace.be.tf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Zeger Knaepen wrote:
>
> I was just looking at some of the real-time raytracing demos at
> http://www.acm.org/tog/resources/RTNews/demos/overview.htm and I was
> wondering: why can't POV-Ray be that fast?
>
If you restrict a raytracer to a very basic functionality (like only
certain highly optimized shapes) you can gain a major speedup.
Furthermore these programs use direct access to the graphics hardware and
probably integer arithmetic for their calculations.
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmx de>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Zeger Knaepen <zeg### [at] studentkuleuvenacbe> wrote:
: why can't POV-Ray be that fast?
Because povray doesn't model just spheres and cylinders without textures.
To get a decent scene you need lots of primitives and complicated textures,
lighting algorithms and so on.
The reason is the same why 3DStudio is not a real-time renderer even
though games draw similar images in real-time.
--
char*i="b[7FK@`3NB6>B:b3O6>:B:b3O6><`3:;8:6f733:>::b?7B>:>^B>C73;S1";
main(_,c,m){for(m=32;c=*i++-49;c&m?puts(""):m)for(_=(
c/4)&7;putchar(m),_--?m:(_=(1<<(c&3))-1,(m^=3)&3););} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Because povray doesn't model just spheres and cylinders without
textures.
>
> To get a decent scene you need lots of primitives and complicated
textures,
> lighting algorithms and so on.
a couple of those on the site do feature proc textures, a variety of shapes
and simple csg animations.
however these raytracers are very highly optomised to just the scenes the
demo shows, and there is often a pixel doubling routing on the go to blow
the real time rendered output (anything from 160x80 - 320x240) up full
screen
--
Rick
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://Povray.co.uk
Kitty5 WebDesign - http://Kitty5.com
Hi-Impact web site design & database driven e-commerce
TEL : +44 (01625) 266358 - FAX : +44 (01625) 611913 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
tnx for your answers...
Still, I think POV-Ray should be made much faster than it currently is :)
cu!
--
ZK
http://www.povplace.be.tf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Strange, I find POV-Ray much faster now than it was a couple of years ago...
"Zeger Knaepen" <zeg### [at] studentkuleuvenacbe> wrote in message
news:3ac90558@news.povray.org...
> tnx for your answers...
> Still, I think POV-Ray should be made much faster than it currently is :)
>
> cu!
>
> --
> ZK
> http://www.povplace.be.tf
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Spock wrote:
>
> Strange, I find POV-Ray much faster now than it was a couple of years ago...
So do I : I remember it would take a whole night to render a simple
stone cup at 320x200 on my old Atari STe :)
--
JM
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 01:03:37 +0200 Zeger Knaepen wrote:
>tnx for your answers...
>Still, I think POV-Ray should be made much faster than it currently is :)
The solution is simple - you need a faster computer for POV-Ray. As a side
benefit, your secondary applications will also perform better ;)
--
Alan - ako### [at] povrayorg - a k o n g <at> p o v r a y <dot> o r g
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 01:03:37 +0200, Zeger Knaepen wrote:
>tnx for your answers...
>Still, I think POV-Ray should be made much faster than it currently is :)
Feel free to contribute some fixes that make it so.
--
Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
My opinions. Mine. Not anyone else's.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3ac74223@news.povray.org> , "Zeger Knaepen"
<zeg### [at] studentkuleuvenacbe> wrote:
> I was just looking at some of the real-time raytracing demos at
> http://www.acm.org/tog/resources/RTNews/demos/overview.htm and I was
> wondering: why can't POV-Ray be that fast?
It can. You just have to remove the parsing stage for every frame. You
can do this either by constructing objects manually in memory or by
parsing once and then manipulating the objects directly. It is
possible, not too much work and you get a decent frame rate on an
average system. However, you should reduce max trace level to two or
three.
Just be aware which options you have to turn off because they assume a
static scene and do break real-time manipulation of the scene if you
don't fix them on the fly, too. For example the vista buffer or object
bounding.
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
