I've got an object and I want a lightsource inside it, 
so I used: 
 
union{

      object{Whatever .....}

      light_source{<0,0,0>
                   color rgb 0.5
                  }
     }

or even:

union{
  
      object{Whatever .....}
      
      object{
             light_source{<0,0,0>
                          color rgb 0.5
                         }
            }
     }


With either of these I get a warning that a CSG should have more than 
one object. So in order to make the warning go away I've tried:


object{Whatever .....
  
      light_source{<0,0,0>
                   color rgb 0.5
                  }
      }  // End of object.

This won't render I get an error message telling me that I must use
the new syntax. 

So if someone could tell me how to get rid of the warnings or what 
the new syntax is I'd be grateful.


-- 
Cheers
Steve              email mailto:sjl### [at] ndirectcouk

%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee  0 pps. 

web http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~sjlen/

or  http://start.at/zero-pps

 11:48pm  up 1 day, 20:22,  7 users,  load average: 2.06, 1.57, 1.31

Post a reply to this message

Steve wrote:
> 
> I've got an object and I want a lightsource inside it,
> so I used:

> With either of these I get a warning that a CSG should have more than
> one object. So in order to make the warning go away I've tried:

> This won't render I get an error message telling me that I must use
> the new syntax.

The new syntax warning means do not declare your light_source as an
object use instead -

light_source{<0,0,0>
             color rgb 0.5
            } // End of light_source.

Since a light source is not considered an object in POV-Ray it does
not count as one in a csg operation. Ignore the warnings and it will
work anyway.

-- 
Ken Tyler -  1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

Steve wrote:
> 
> I've got an object and I want a lightsource inside it,

You could try
light_source{
  <0,0,0>
  rgb 0.5
  looks_like{ some_object }
  }

This effectively makes a union of the light_source and the object.

PoD.

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 16:25:45 -0800, Ken wrote:
>
>
>Steve wrote:
>> 
>> I've got an object and I want a lightsource inside it,
>> so I used:
>
>> With either of these I get a warning that a CSG should have more than
>> one object. So in order to make the warning go away I've tried:
>
>> This won't render I get an error message telling me that I must use
>> the new syntax.
>
>The new syntax warning means do not declare your light_source as an
>object use instead -
>
>light_source{<0,0,0>
>             color rgb 0.5
>            } // End of light_source.
>
>Since a light source is not considered an object in POV-Ray it does
>not count as one in a csg operation. Ignore the warnings and it will
>work anyway.
>

Man that was fast.  Guess I'll just have to live with the warnings
then.  

Pod suggests using a looks_like, but for some reason I hate the 
looks_like statement with a passion. 

Thanks.  

-- 
Cheers
Steve              email mailto:sjl### [at] ndirectcouk

%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee  0 pps. 

web http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~sjlen/

or  http://start.at/zero-pps

 12:27am  up 1 day, 21:02,  6 users,  load average: 1.14, 1.14, 1.10

Post a reply to this message

Steve <sjl### [at] ndirectcouk> wrote:
: Pod suggests using a looks_like, but for some reason I hate the 
: looks_like statement with a passion. 

  There's nothing to hate about the looks_like. It however works differently
from an union.
  Firstly it implicitly makes the object shadowless.
  Secondly it translates the object with the location of the light.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

On 21 Mar 2000 04:33:25 -0500, Nieminen Juha wrote:
>Steve <sjl### [at] ndirectcouk> wrote:
>: Pod suggests using a looks_like, but for some reason I hate the 
>: looks_like statement with a passion. 
>
>  There's nothing to hate about the looks_like. It however works differently
>from an union.
>  Firstly it implicitly makes the object shadowless.
>  Secondly it translates the object with the location of the light.

That's why I hate it, I had some quite bad early experiences with it, 
mainly not being able to predict where the hell the thing would be,
I've played with it a lot but don't seem to be able to master it.

I've used looks_like in the title images on my web page, but can't
tell quite what it's doing, the images look good to me so I've left
the looks_like in there, I've tried moving it around, but nothing
seems to move, so I've vowed never to use them again. 

-- 
Cheers
Steve              email mailto:sjl### [at] ndirectcouk

%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee  0 pps. 

web http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~sjlen/

or  http://start.at/zero-pps

  4:40pm  up 5 days, 13:14,  6 users,  load average: 1.03, 1.14, 1.19

Post a reply to this message

No problem.

light_source
{ 0,1
  looks_like { whatever }
  translate <1,2,3>
}

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message