 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I expected this kind of problem :-) With one switch declared at begining
you
> can easy control more than one place in script. For example you can vary
> ambient of object depending radiosity is on or off. For example:
>
> #declare Use_All = off;
> #declare Use_Light = ( off | Use_All );
> #declare Use_Radiosity = ( on | Use_All );
> #declare Use_Transparency = ( on | Use_All );
Interesting! I'll have to put that in.
I've been looking at the 3.5 beta today, and getting some pretty impressive
results.
Some of the things that I noticed are that radiosity amplitude of 40 was not
necessary anymore, values around 1 seem just fine. Also, I have some leds
that are viewed through light pipes (spotlights that "look like" LED
objects) and they could also be turned WAY down from what they were.
I did see some light that appears to have come through my solid case, in
places where there's no holes, but I'm re-rendering now, with the light
values scaled back twoard 1, to see if maybe that was just a math error.
I also am looking at "photons", as this project involves some transparent
and "lensy" plastics.
Looks like a lot more fun to be had with POV :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002 12:17:04 -0500, "Dave VanHorn" <dva### [at] cedar net> wrote:
> I've been looking at the 3.5 beta today, and getting some pretty impressive
> results.
Today ? So you probably not rendered all sample files yet. Take a look at them
carefully (with help of
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.utilities/25029/ ). And since you have
access to Win you can be interested in http://www.abx.art.pl/pov/bonus (not
updated to current beta release yet, sorry).
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dave VanHorn wrote:
> Looks like a lot more fun to be had with POV :)
The fun never stops...
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> #if(Use_Transparency)
> interior{ ior GlassIOR }
> #end
Why is this even necessary? If the object has no transparency, the ior
value will have no effect (fresnel reflection notwithstanding) so it
shouldn't be necessary to turn it on or off (unless it has some effect on
trace time that I'm not aware of).
-tgq
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 8 Jul 2002 08:55:57 -0400, "TinCanMan" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom>
wrote:
> > #if(Use_Transparency)
> > interior{ ior GlassIOR }
> > #end
>
> Why is this even necessary?
To save memory usage ?
Becouse copying objects with unassigned properities could be faster ?
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> To save memory usage ?
Does a texture take less memory if some of its blocks are not specified?
I haven't looked at the source code, but a texture might be fixed-sized.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8 Jul 2002 09:21:57 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> > To save memory usage ?
>
> Does a texture take less memory if some of its blocks are not specified?
Does your question means that we return to opinion that ior should be part of
texturing ? ;-)
> I haven't looked at the source code, but a texture might be fixed-sized.
Unless definion not include variable-sized content. For example (considering
interior):
SCENE : box{ -100 100 }
PEAK MEM : 117.776
SCENE : box{ -100 100 interior{ ior .5 } }
PEAK MEM : 117.776
SCENE : #declare Interior = interior{ ior .5 media{} }
: box{ -100 100 interior{ ior .5 } }
PEAK MEM : 117.776
SCENE : #declare Interior = interior{ ior .5 media{} }
: box{ -100 100 interior{ Interior } }
PEAK MEM : 118.100
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <s73jiugqk9dnvc40tjidg9b2ok7jj4v4a8@4ax.com>,
W?odzimierz ABX Skiba <abx### [at] babilonorg> wrote:
> To save memory usage ?
> Becouse copying objects with unassigned properities could be faster ?
Nope. The interior structure includes ior value whether you specify one
or not. And when copying, everything gets copied, whether or not it is
actually used.
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Jul 2002 09:37:59 -0500, Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
wrote:
> > To save memory usage ?
> > Becouse copying objects with unassigned properities could be faster ?
>
> Nope. The interior structure includes ior value whether you specify one
> or not. And when copying, everything gets copied, whether or not it is
> actually used.
You are talking about pure interior, but since media is part of it ...
Anyway I started thinking about one case when interior shouldn't be off when
texture is not transparent: media + transparent interior texture.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <c59jiug233sc7jdaba0h2rf336pqdht1el@4ax.com>,
W?odzimierz ABX Skiba <abx### [at] babilonorg> wrote:
> You are talking about pure interior, but since media is part of it ...
Well, yeah, media has parts that are not reserved from the start, things
like density and color maps. The structure keeps a pointer that can be
set to memory allocated for them. For ordinary on/off flags and
float/vector/color values, it isn't be worth it.
> Anyway I started thinking about one case when interior shouldn't be off when
> texture is not transparent: media + transparent interior texture.
Or camera inside the object (possibly due to "inverse").
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
