 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2004 07:55:13 -0400, "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256 com> wrote:
> abx### [at] abxartpl news:7t0kh01u9n0vhnifgfppomj8a3lugdqs71@4ax.com
> > You could avoid it if you would not think about POV-Ray like free
> > drawing library, IMHO.
>
> I am using it as free drawing library, to create GUI for application for
> example
Then you are not using it as a library, but as a development tool. To the
end-user it's invisible.
> I thought that is one of purposes of
> Pov-RAY, other are using it for creating games graphics etc, etc...
Again, creation of graphic is part of development of game.
> > In view of your past posts I think your thinking about nature,
> > ownership and developers is somewhere incomplete.
(I forgot to add "of POV-Ray" somewhere in the sentence.)
> ?
Hard to explain. It's something which caused others to less frequently answer
to your posts.
> > Just drop idea of POV and stay with OpenGL.
>
> Radiosity, reflections, (area)shadows, CSG+transforms(only last one is
> easy to write self)
Well, those are not features for fast preview in CAD program.
Note that even Moray switched to OpenGL preview and there is one for POV-Ray
itself somewhere too.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
abx### [at] abxartpl news:fs2kh01hf179tq5dhku1a1du2e1oe2o1mu@4ax.com
> Well, those are not features for fast preview in CAD program.
> Note that even Moray switched to OpenGL preview and there is one for
> POV-Ray itself somewhere too.
>
Preview in my program would be in 2D. This is a 2D projecting program
mostly. If it was up to me, I would concentrate on this and gave just
Export to .pov future as a cool addition.
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote:
<Snip>
> First of all - povray OUTPUT (not povray program itself). License say that
> one can whatever he wants with it (all images are property of scene file
> creator). Is PovRAY team/users/creators - rather heapy that it can be used
> in serious and/or commercial projects?
Why not? Output is the result of the user's creative input, why should the
developer have a say in its usage? That's like saying a letter I create in
M$ Word needs to be approved by M$ before I can send it.
<Snip>
> For example - I was hoping that perhaps I will have chance to make a 3d
> editor my self some day. If my 2d house-planning software would be more
> closely integrated to PovRAY (it will be quite close anyway, in the 3D
> visualization part, but such small problems like not putting Pov on same CD
> can result in more or less decrease of product remunerate and/or my
> position in job with leads to lover budget with this project related in
> some way to povray).
So basically you are upset because under the license you cannot make some
money you hoped to make on someone else's work. I suspect the license is
there at least partly for that reason.
<Snip>
> projects like Blender create software fundation, get lots of money from UE
> (AFAIK) and therefore can develope much quicker also greate software.
As is their right... but POV team also has right to develop as they see fit.
<Snip>
> Is blocking usage of PovRay renderer a good thing to do?
> AFAIK there are some legal problems, if we would perhaps will someday to
> change pov license to gave it better chances to expand and be known and
> usefull software - like Apache, Linux, GCC
I find it quite useful as is.
<Snip>
> and realy working togeather can bring better profits for everyone :)
However, profit may not be the primary motivation for everyone. Looking at
the history, usage and distribution of POV tends to make me think that
contributing to knowledge, and creating something of true quality that is
freely available to further advance that knowledge and distribute it are
strong motivators to the developers. I have certainly learned a lot just
using it.
This is not intended in any way as attacking you for your endeavor, by all
means try to do what you can to realize your talents to make a living. As I
am not a developer I usually avoid license discussions, but the number of
posts regarding your endeavor, most of which seem to indicate a certain
degree of annoyance and impatience with the development team because they
did not respond to your requests in a manner and timing to your liking,
drew me into contributing my .02 cents.
I think that much of your frustration would have been eliminated had you
simply made your license inquiries prior to proposing your project to the
client rather than after. It's always an easier path when you have a
project that needs only the customer's yea or nay to proceed, rather than
then having to work out critical details in midstream.
My thanks to the POV team for their work and their product.
RG
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
rgo### [at] lansetcom news:web.411a884c6ea4cf20a0c272b50@news.povray.org
> So basically you are upset because under the license you cannot make
> some money you hoped to make on someone else's work.
I was almost shure that PovRAY can be distributed, as long as source code
and credits are proviced, I must have mistaken it with some other software,
my fault.
There is nothing wrong _in general_ - programmers are making money on GCC
compiler, webmasters on Apache and GIMP, I just forgot about that
differences license is for PovImages, totaly different for PovRay it self.
> As is their right... but POV team also has right to develop as they
> see fit.
Yeap
> I find it quite useful as is.
In any case, maybe there is a good solution - an isometric pseudo-3d view.
It will
- give nice results
- have simplified radiosity/lighting engine (it is quite easy for izometric
view I hope)
- will use pre-rendered tiles and objects (as in for exampel Sims). It
would be a bit harder (since wals can have any dimensions, angles) but I
hope not so hard.
- use a big library of povray objects (that can be maybe released later as
*.inc freeware).
- doesnt reqiure me to learn OpenGL and make both mesh ans pure .pov
objects
- it still can *in addition* generate .pov file to make it possible for
advanced users to make real 3d scene out of it
- perhaps when this version is on the market program will have some chance
of beeing distributed someday with pov since it would be not essentional
extension then
One CD should have enought room to hold each object in different angles
(iometric view from 4 sides), top-view, and an icon.
Any suggestions?
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think there's a lot of confusion amoung the participants in this thread,
most likely due to the language barrier. Here's what I understand Rafal
was trying to do:
1) Write a CAD program for designing house/building plans.
2) Allow the CAD program to export the drawing as a .pov file.
3) Allow the CAD program to execute POV-Ray with the above file passed in
and rendered automatically.
4) Be able to distribute both the CAD program *and* POV-Ray on the CD, so
that the prospective user doesn't have to download POV-Ray themselves.
It seems to me that only number four goes against the POV-Ray license, the
rest is done by a number of other applications. But his "distributor"
won't allow the CAD program to be packaged without POV-Ray.
For what it's worth, I agree with Rafal that this kind of distribution
should be allowed. In my mind it's very similar to modern games that
distribute DirectX on the game CD, or other applications that distribute
Acrobat Reader on the application CD for eading documentation, etc.
Rich Allen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
SrP### [at] ricoswebcom
news:Xns9542B40AB2D62spammindspringcom@203.29.75.35
> thread, most likely due to the language barrier. Here's what I
> understand Rafal was trying to do:
Thanx, good and simple summary.
> 1) Write a CAD program for designing house/building plans.
1a) 2d graphics - like wireframe view from above and looking down
1b) with isometric pseudo 3D view (from 4 sides, or from above), using
tiles and other bitmaps rendered in POV. I will provide some simple
radiosity, light and shadow calcultions written myself.
> 2) Allow the CAD program to export the drawing as a .pov file.
In addition to .bmp export of 1a) and 1b)
> 3) Allow the CAD program to execute POV-Ray with the above file passed
> in and rendered automatically.
> 4) Be able to distribute both the CAD program *and* POV-Ray on the CD,
> so that the prospective user doesn't have to download POV-Ray
> themselves.
Yes. Or - to just put that povwin36.exe file on CD. We can also put some
PovRay banners on CD or even copy of www.povray.org, so it would be exacly
like going to that page - only more comfortable way - something like www
mirror on that CD.
> It seems to me that only number four goes against the POV-Ray license,
Yes, also point 1b) is o.k. (using only output).
> the rest is done by a number of other applications. But his
> "distributor" won't allow the CAD program to be packaged without
> POV-Ray.
> For what it's worth, I agree with Rafal that this kind of distribution
> should be allowed. In my mind it's very similar to modern games that
> distribute DirectX on the game CD, or other applications that
> distribute Acrobat Reader on the application CD for eading
> documentation, etc.
In fact perhaps point 1b) would be enought - I was told by PovTeam to write
own visualization code. Ofcourse I will not write a full raytracer, but
results of 1b) should be interesting.
P.S. I will soon put some drafts of program in off-topic and .binary.images
Thanks
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2004 19:41:51 -0400, Rich <SrP### [at] ricoswebcom> wrote:
> I think there's a lot of confusion amoung the participants in this thread,
> most likely due to the language barrier.
Note that while I use the same native language as Rafal, he prefered to use
his broken english to complain. While I'm not that much important developer I
still could explain him a few things if he would asked privately before making
any assumptions about usage of POV-Ray.
> Here's what I understand Rafal was trying to do:
Yes, points 1-4 are exactly my understanding.
> 4) Be able to distribute both the CAD program *and* POV-Ray on the CD, so
> that the prospective user doesn't have to download POV-Ray themselves.
>
> It seems to me that only number four goes against the POV-Ray license, the
> rest is done by a number of other applications. But his "distributor"
> won't allow the CAD program to be packaged without POV-Ray.
My understanding is that POV-Ray (as his _owner_ decided) can't be distributed
with CAD, then CAD producer decided to not support POV-Ray output. This is
fine and understable. The problem is that Rafal seemed to think about POV-Ray
as vital part of the application to simplify his development. But that was
_his_ assumption. Both CAD producer and POV-Team has good reasons to make
their decisions althought in result Rafal become out of employment.
> For what it's worth, I agree with Rafal that this kind of distribution
> should be allowed.
POV-Ray has an owner. Let him decide what should and should not be done.
> In my mind it's very similar to modern games that
> distribute DirectX on the game CD, or other applications that distribute
> Acrobat Reader on the application CD for eading documentation, etc.
DirecX is an API which is almost part of OS, Acrobat reader is a viewer for
standarized format - both made commercially released to increase popularity of
the standards supported by other commercial products of their manufacturers.
More DirectX distributed means more games for Windows, which means increased
Windows usage, which means money. The same with Acrobat Reader and other Adobe
PDF products and popularisation of nonfree electronic books. So their "free"
nature is calculation of the profits for the cost to be included on CDs I see
in shops for 1$ and less. POV-Ray is IMO something which deserves to be
targeted to kind of elite (in the meaning of degree of inteligence and
discovery nature) which means that people should _want_ to find it (accidental
finding is also caused by searching nature), _want_ to try it, _want_ to stay
with it and _want_ to investigate furtherand. Some do it making awesome
photorealistic images, some do it making patches, some do it making helpful
include files. Ok. I probably wrote too long obscure paragraph here but I
needed some rest from other task.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
abx### [at] abxartpl news:gk5mh051gnv775p6rthoebs5ijqcmosb2i@4ax.com
> Note that while I use the same native language as Rafal, he prefered
> to use his broken english to complain. While I'm not that much
Yeap, I was thinking - what language to use - my perfect english skills, or
my bad ones, after a while I decided to use the second possibility.
> in shops for 1$ and less. POV-Ray is IMO something which deserves to
> be targeted to kind of elite (in the meaning of degree of inteligence
> and discovery nature) which means that people should _want_ to find it
> (accidental finding is also caused by searching nature), _want_ to try
Maybe hide www.povray.org then? It will require more searching nature to
find Pov then.
> it, _want_ to stay with it and _want_ to investigate furtherand. Some
> do it making awesome photorealistic images, some do it making patches,
> some do it making helpful include files. Ok. I probably wrote too long
> obscure paragraph here but I needed some rest from other task.
And for serious, I thought that most programs want either to have more
funding, or to be more popular. IRTC CDs, keyrings was aimed for first
purpose, promoting PovRAY by search engines, competitions etc - at second
one. I hoped to gave both more or less.
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ABX wrote:
>
> DirecX is an API which is almost part of OS, Acrobat reader is a viewer for
> standarized format - both made commercially released to increase popularity of
> the standards supported by other commercial products of their manufacturers.
> More DirectX distributed means more games for Windows, which means increased
> Windows usage, which means money. The same with Acrobat Reader and other Adobe
> PDF products and popularisation of nonfree electronic books. So their "free"
> nature is calculation of the profits for the cost to be included on CDs I see
> in shops for 1$ and less.
In fact Adobe is distributing Acrobat Reader for free is simply a
marketing strategy - they hope to boost their sales of Acrobat and their
other products this way (and it is completely undoubted they have
success with that).
This all has nothing to do with the question of commercial bundling of
POV-Ray of course.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 06 Jul. 2004 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ing### [at] tagpovrayorg news:Xns9542517FB8FF9seed7@news.povray.org
> Anyway, you did the right thing, contacted the team and asked their
> permission. You didn't get the awnser you hoped for, so be it. Others
> probably do it differently, they steal the code and use it anyway. What
> do you prefer, To still be able to output POV-SDL from your application
> to render with POV-Ray, or being a thief?
Most peoples would called me stupid, it would be quite easy to reduce,
change a bit, and recompile source code to hide it's origins. But thats not
my way :)
> Use your energie to write your application, not on "what could have been
> if ..."
Client had accepted my new idea of 3d visualization after all :)
I will use pre-rendered objects to put them on izometric 3D view. Some
special objects, like walls I will render myself. I will add some lighting
algorithms. So I will write own 3d engine, that will used sprites (bitmaps)
with pre-rendered objects from Pov-Ray.
I hope to achive image quality simmilar to that from The Simms game, (but
in higher resolution and with any type of rooms, also not-rectangular).
Signing of contract would be on monday probably, wish me luck ;)
Oh, and I will anyway put thoes Pov-RAY logos there, and in sooner or later
version - add .pov output, perhaps I will also add small changes to Pov
source to implement few special output formats (like - exporting the shadow
map and z-buffer) and I will try to make some part of my furniture objects
freeware.
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
