 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tony[B]" wrote:
>
> Because we can? Or as JFK would say: "Not because it is easy, but because it
> is hard." OK. Real reason: I think it would make the files smaller and give
> you more control later, no?
Smaller file sixes perhaps, greater control later, not. NURBS are great to
to use in a GUI environment. Trying to manipulate them without a GUI interface
would be madness. How many people do you personaly know (shut up, Ron) that can
hand code a single bezier patch ? Even if the syntax were simplified to the
maximum extent their complexity of use would still far surpass the difficulty
of use of a simple bezier patch.
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Jun 2001 22:13:21 -0700, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbell net> wrote:
>Smaller file sixes perhaps, greater control later, not. NURBS are great to
>to use in a GUI environment. Trying to manipulate them without a GUI interface
>would be madness. How many people do you personaly know (shut up, Ron) that can
>hand code a single bezier patch ?
<raises hand>
>Even if the syntax were simplified to the
>maximum extent their complexity of use would still far surpass the difficulty
>of use of a simple bezier patch.
What about generating nurbs on the fly with macros? The tessellation
phase will be done by the pre-renderer and not by the parser and will
be much faster. It could be helpful for macros such as Stricia or the
rock macro.
In the current time frame, though, I think the Team has more important
work than nurbing POV. If anyone decides to patch POV to use NURBS,
well, ok :)
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3B1875F1.645BC24C@pacbell.net>, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet>
wrote:
> How many people do you personaly know (shut up, Ron) that
> can hand code a single bezier patch ?
<Raises hand...>
It's not that hard, really...easier than meshes.
> Even if the syntax were simplified to the maximum extent their
> complexity of use would still far surpass the difficulty of use of a
> simple bezier patch.
True. But they would be useful when automatically generated by macros,
or as output from GUI modellers. One clear advantage: it would be
possible to do some of the tesselation at render-time, so memory could
be saved and visible "facets" minimized.
--
Christopher James Huff - chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Huff wrote:
>
> In article <3B1875F1.645BC24C@pacbell.net>, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet>
> wrote:
>
> > How many people do you personaly know (shut up, Ron) that
> > can hand code a single bezier patch ?
>
> <Raises hand...>
> It's not that hard, really...easier than meshes.
<Raises hand...>
I've hand coded meshes...patches damage my brain.
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune <run### [at] mobilixnetdk> wrote:
: Would it be possible to implement nurbs in POV-Ray?
I see no reason why NURBS (or should it be said "NURBSes"?) couldn't be
implemented as macros which generate triangles or bicubic patches.
AFAIK NURBS can be simulated with bicubic patches if you use several
of them (spatch does exactly that). And if everything else fails, it could
just generate a triangle mesh.
The only drawback would be speed, specially if triangles are generated.
However, I think that's a quite small price to pay for the functionality
(as I have preached several times before, if humanly possible, every new
feature should be implemented as macros instead of a patch if it makes
sense and you don't have to make too many compromises).
However, I think that the biggest problem is your next question:
: Would it be reasonable?
As Ken said, NURBS are useful mainly in GUI modellers.
Perhaps it could be possible to make the NURBS macros as easy to use as
possible, but still it would be a pain to hand-code objects with them.
: The reason I'm interested in these nurbs is that I find bicubic patches too
: limiting for what I want to do.
Is it something you can't do with spatch (or hamapatch for that matter)?
--
#macro N(D,I)#if(I<6)cylinder{M()#local D[I]=div(D[I],104);M().5,2pigment{
rgb M()}}N(D,(D[I]>99?I:I+1))#end#end#macro M()<mod(D[I],13)-6,mod(div(D[I
],13),8)-3,10>#end blob{N(array[6]{11117333955,
7382340,3358,3900569407,970,4254934330},0)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ken" wrote:
> How many people do you personaly know (shut up, Ron)
> that can hand code a single bezier patch ?
<raises hand>
I can hand code them and I can also generate them by macros (and that way
I'm able to animate them).
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 10)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" wrote:
> "Rune" wrote
> : The reason I'm interested in these nurbs is that I
> : find bicubic patches too limiting for what I want to do.
>
> Is it something you can't do with spatch (or hamapatch
> for that matter)?
Yes.
First, I am modeler impaired. I can't use modelers. But even if I could, I
doubt it'd work for my purpose, since I need to animate my patches according
to certain variables.
Nurbs may not be exactly what I'm looking for, I'll post another message in
this thread where I describe my actual problem.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 10)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The reason I had these nurbs questions is that I have some problems with
bicubic patches, and wanted to know if it could possible have something to
do with the differences between nurbs and bicubic patches.
My actual problem is this: I need to model smooth shapes with relative
complicated topology. As far as I have understood bicubic patches always
have four corners and they can only be matched up four corners at a time if
the surface needs to be smooth. This means they can't be used for smooth
surfaces with complicated topology.
I have been wondering how the problem is usually handled. When looking at
wireframes made with nurbs I notice that there's almost always a few vital
patches with three or five corners. And the surface is still completely
smooth. Is that a special ability nurbs have or what...?
Anyway, any ideas how I can solve my problem? Would it work to create a
triangular bicubic patch by using a regular bicubic patch where one half is
transparent? I mean, would I get a smooth surface if I filled in such a half
patch between regular patches with four corners? In other words, do the
spline between 4 diagonal points behave the same way as the spline between 4
edge points?
I hope there's a solution out there.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 10)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > How many people do you personaly know (shut up, Ron) that
> > can hand code a single bezier patch ?
>
> <Raises hand...>
> It's not that hard, really...easier than meshes.
done both, but not for a long while, and even then I want through a dozen or
so post it notes with teeny doodles on stuck all round my screen
--
Rick
Kitty5 WebDesign - http://Kitty5.com
Hi-Impact database driven web site design & e-commerce
TEL : +44 (01625) 266358 - FAX : +44 (01625) 611913 - ICQ : 15776037
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://Povray.co.uk
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3b191185@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>
wrote:
> I see no reason why NURBS (or should it be said "NURBSes"?)
Probably "NURBSs". The "S" stands for "Spline", and you simply tack an
"s" on the end to make it "Splines", so I would do the same for the
acronym.
> The only drawback would be speed, specially if triangles are generated.
Not the only drawback...it will use more memory and the lack of adaptive
render-time tesselation means you would have more triangles than you
needed, or visible faceting.
> Is it something you can't do with spatch (or hamapatch for that matter)?
Well, I couldn't use spatch. I could use PatchDance, though...
--
Christopher James Huff - chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
