> Timwi <pov### [at] timwide> wrote:
>> As far as I can tell, the Windows version of POV-ray comes only with a GUI.
>>
>> What do I need to do to get a command-line-compatible renderer?
>
> I used batch files like this for Windows batch renders:
> ________________________________________________________________________________
>
> setlocal
> set PATH=%PATH%;"C:\Users\Ricky Callwood\AppData\Local\Programs\POV-Ray\3.7\bin"
> :
> start /w /min pvengine-sse2 /nr /exit +imyscenefile1.pov
> start /w /min pvengine-sse2 /nr /exit +imyscenefile2.pov
> start /w /min pvengine-sse2 /nr /exit +imyscenefile3.pov
> start /w /min pvengine-sse2 /nr /exit 'myinifile[section1]'
> start /w /min pvengine-sse2 /nr /exit 'myinifile[section2]'
> start /w /min pvengine-sse2 /nr /exit 'myinifile[section3]'
> :
> endlocal
> ________________________________________________________________________________
>
> The splash screen still showed, but it worked.  (Annoying, yes, but the POV team
> has its reasons for insisting on the splash screen.)  You would set the PATH to
> whatever is appropriate for your system.
>
> Note that I used the /nr switch to keep it from wasting time loading the editor
> windows.  If you don't want to lose your editor windows, you must keep one GUI
> session open during the batch run and set Options | Keep Single Instance to OFF.
>
>
>

A simple question:
WHY always add /exit in each command lines? Why not remove all /exit but 
the last? That way, you start the first scene, when it's finished, you 
start the second, without the splash screen. You also can save a little 
time as you don't need to reload and initiate POV-Ray for each render.


Alain

Post a reply to this message

Alain <kua### [at] videotronca> wrote:
> A simple question:
> WHY always add /exit in each command lines? Why not remove all /exit but
> the last? That way, you start the first scene, when it's finished, you
> start the second, without the splash screen. You also can save a little
> time as you don't need to reload and initiate POV-Ray for each render.

It's been many years since I did the experimentation and settled on that
combination of switches, but I seem to recall having twenty instances open up
simultaneously on my poor computer.  Nowadays, I avoid Windoze for the sake of
my mental health, so I'm not about to start experimenting again.

Post a reply to this message

On 16/03/2013 18:27, clipka wrote:
>
> As for "massively" inconveniencing "all" Windows users: Most Windows
> users have been happy to run their renders from within the GUI, and
> Windows never really made batch processing easy anyway, so people
> requiring batch processing would typically turn towards Linux in the
> first place.

Only opinionated Linux users can seriously think that :(

There is nothing about Windows that makes command-line stuff like batch 
processing *so* hard that it would be worth it to install, run and learn 


this.

Timwi

Post a reply to this message

On 17/03/2013 00:47, Alain wrote:
>
> A simple question:
> WHY always add /exit in each command lines? Why not remove all /exit but
> the last? That way, you start the first scene, when it's finished, you
> start the second, without the splash screen. You also can save a little
> time as you don't need to reload and initiate POV-Ray for each render.

It would be a nice compromise if that were possible, however POV-ray 
still pops up and steals focus if you do that. (Plus POV-ray makes this 



the options like image size on the command-line. You have to set up the 
GUI the right way.)

Timwi

Post a reply to this message

Timwi <pov### [at] timwide> wrote:
> It would be a nice compromise if that were possible, however POV-ray
> still pops up and steals focus if you do that. (Plus POV-ray makes this

> so that you can start the next render.

The batch file I posted does serial rendering unattended.


> simultaneous renderings in a single instance.

It does, however, support multiple instances.  (In the Options menu, uncheck
Keep Single Instance.)  Whether it /loads/ multiple instances I cannot answer,
since my technical knowledge of Windows stalled in 1995.  With POV-Ray 3.7's SMP
support, though, it shouldn't matter whether your renders are serial or
parallel.


> the options like image size on the command-line. You have to set up the
> GUI the right way.)

You most certainly can do that on the command line.  Have you tried the +W and
+H options?

Post a reply to this message

Timwi <pov### [at] timwide> wrote:
> On 16/03/2013 18:27, clipka wrote:
> >
> > As for "massively" inconveniencing "all" Windows users: Most Windows
> > users have been happy to run their renders from within the GUI, and
> > Windows never really made batch processing easy anyway, so people
> > requiring batch processing would typically turn towards Linux in the
> > first place.
>
> Only opinionated Linux users can seriously think that :(

Call me opinionated, then.

> There is nothing about Windows that makes command-line stuff like batch
> processing *so* hard that it would be worth it to install, run and learn
> Linux.

I used to hate Unix.  Then I got a job working with IBM's AIX operating system,
and it grew on me.  Working with a Windows PC, I found myself downloading Gnu
tools to do the things I took for granted with AIX (and still not able to use
those tools as effectively as under a Unix-like system).  Then when my XP system
crashed, I upgraded to the super-duper fantabulous Windows 7, which I'm sure has
taken months off my life expectancy.  With Micro$haft's concept of
"user-friendly" driving me batty, and me downloading Gnu tools anyway, I figured
I might as well try Linux.

I'm much happier with Linux.  But I believe in freedom of religion, and one has
the right to choose Windows.

Post a reply to this message

On 20/03/2013 4:44 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> It does, however, support multiple instances.  (In the Options menu, uncheck
> Keep Single Instance.)

By the bye, with Keep Single Instance, checked. You can run an instance 
of the 64 bit and an instance of the 32 bit RC7 versions at the same time.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 20/03/2013 17:44, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> Timwi <pov### [at] timwide> wrote:
>> It would be a nice compromise if that were possible, however POV-ray
>> still pops up and steals focus if you do that. (Plus POV-ray makes this

>> so that you can start the next render.
>
> The batch file I posted does serial rendering unattended.

So does mine. Yours still pops up a needless GUI for every new render.

> It does, however, support multiple instances.

I am well aware of that.


>> the options like image size on the command-line. You have to set up the
>> GUI the right way.)
>
> You most certainly can do that on the command line.


Otherwise, how did you think I am rendering right now?

Timwi

Post a reply to this message

Timwi <pov### [at] timwide> wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the Windows version of POV-ray comes only with a GUI.
>
> What do I need to do to get a command-line-compatible renderer?

there is a way to get around this:

What you do is turn your sequential files that you would normally render with a
..bat file into .inc files then you put them into an array in a new file, like so
--

#declare render_queue =
array [num] {
"file1.inc",
"file2,inc",
....
"file(num-1).inc"
}

include render_queue[frame_number]

I haven't tested it, but I think it should work; although it might pose problems
for batch rendering animations...

If each file you were rendering had it's own .ini file, it might work.

Regards,
A.D.B.

Post a reply to this message

Am 20.03.2013 17:03, schrieb Timwi:
> On 16/03/2013 18:27, clipka wrote:
>>
>> As for "massively" inconveniencing "all" Windows users: Most Windows
>> users have been happy to run their renders from within the GUI, and
>> Windows never really made batch processing easy anyway, so people
>> requiring batch processing would typically turn towards Linux in the
>> first place.
>
> Only opinionated Linux users can seriously think that :(

That statement of yours can easily be disproven: I'm a mouse-pushing 
Microsoft addict, who even appreciates some of their products, and I 
personally think that for desktop systems GNU/Linux is still no serious 
alternative to Windows; and I'm a layman when it comes to administering 
a Linux system (even though I'm a professional software developer), to 
the point that I detest administering Linux systems. But when there's 
serious batch processing to do, I'd take Linux any time, and even go 
through the hassle of setting up a system myself.

So there exists at least one person who seriously thinks what I wrote, 
and isn't an opinionated Linux user.

> There is nothing about Windows that makes command-line stuff like batch
> processing *so* hard that it would be worth it to install, run and learn
> Linux.

Believe me, there is.



> this.

For rendering a thousand images, the typical approach would be to set 
this thing up as an animation job.

I'm not saying that users such as you don't exist. But they're far from 
"all" Windows users, and they're not "massively" inconvenienced.

Post a reply to this message