Bernhard Wymann wrote in alt.fan.elite:
> yes, but you can raytrace today on a pc with ...-2 fps. so in
> ten years, you can do it at ...-~202 fps (2*2^(10*12/18), moore's
> law) on the cpu.  if there would be hardware support even faster.
> it's much easier to implement than todays stuff, you don't need
> light maps etc., certain effects you get automaticly right,
> without doing tricks.

You can bet your isosurface I replied to THIS...;)

-- 
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

> > yes, but you can raytrace today on a pc with ...-2 fps. so in

He was right you know.. 2 fps = 2 frames per season..

Hugo

Post a reply to this message

Hugo wrote:
> He was right you know.. 2 fps = 2 frames per season..

*tries to imagine playing a first-person shooter with a refresh
rate of 2 frames per season, fails, tries again...*

*shudder*

"It's at times like this that I wish I'd listened to what
my mother said when I was young."
"Why, what did she say?"
"I don't know, I wasn't listening."
-- 
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

Hugo <hua### [at] post3teledk> wrote:
>> > yes, but you can raytrace today on a pc with ...-2 fps. so in

> He was right you know.. 2 fps = 2 frames per season..

  If I make a simple scene with a couple of reflecting spheres and boxes
which rotate, and render an animation at 320x240 (no aa), with the status
stream turned off, POV-Ray for windows can render it at about 5 frames per
second in my computer.
  This is almost real-time. The objects really rotate in the render window
(if I make the rotation slow enough, it doesn't even look jumpy).

-- 
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3c7cfeee@news.povray.org...
> Hugo <hua### [at] post3teledk> wrote:
> >> > yes, but you can raytrace today on a pc with ...-2 fps. so in
>
> > He was right you know.. 2 fps = 2 frames per season..
>
>   If I make a simple scene with a couple of reflecting spheres and boxes
> which rotate, and render an animation at 320x240 (no aa), with the status
> stream turned off, POV-Ray for windows can render it at about 5 frames per
> second in my computer.
>   This is almost real-time. The objects really rotate in the render window
> (if I make the rotation slow enough, it doesn't even look jumpy).

Wow... in ten years, we'll be able to play raytraced Marble Madness! :)

...Chambers


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.323 / Virus Database: 180 - Release Date: 2/8/2002

Post a reply to this message

Dynamic raytracing... see "heaven 7":

http://www.inf.bme.hu/~exceed/

(click link at the top of the list on the left of the page)

Of course, it uses tons of optimizations and only simple primitives, but
this shows that it's possible...

- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
[ http://www.slimeland.com/images/ ]

Post a reply to this message

Slime wrote:
> Of course, it uses tons of optimizations and only simple primitives, but
> this shows that it's possible...

That...is cool.
-- 
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

Yes,
but in 4 we will have pong 3d
;^P


--
Regards,
C.J. POV User
PRSG
http://hyperion.spaceports.com/~povstudy/
hou### [at] yahoocom

Ben Chambers <bdc### [at] yahoocom> wrote in message
news:3c7d03b8@news.povray.org...
>
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
> news:3c7cfeee@news.povray.org...
> > Hugo <hua### [at] post3teledk> wrote:
> > >> > yes, but you can raytrace today on a pc with ...-2 fps. so in
> >
> > > He was right you know.. 2 fps = 2 frames per season..
> >
> >   If I make a simple scene with a couple of reflecting spheres and boxes
> > which rotate, and render an animation at 320x240 (no aa), with the
status
> > stream turned off, POV-Ray for windows can render it at about 5 frames
per
> > second in my computer.
> >   This is almost real-time. The objects really rotate in the render
window
> > (if I make the rotation slow enough, it doesn't even look jumpy).
>
> Wow... in ten years, we'll be able to play raytraced Marble Madness! :)
>
> ...Chambers
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.323 / Virus Database: 180 - Release Date: 2/8/2002
>
>

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:33:51 -0500, "Slime" <noo### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Of course, it uses tons of optimizations and only simple primitives, but
> this shows that it's possible...

It was possible at time of 386 and afaik much earlier, just OS used less
resources.

ABX

Post a reply to this message

> *tries to imagine playing a first-person shooter with a refresh
> rate of 2 frames per season, fails, tries again...*

3d games look impressing but they are not "raytraced".. However it's
possible that these 3d engines in time will develop into raytracers, and
replace Povray and a lot of other stuff..  :o(

Hugo

Post a reply to this message