 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"gregjohn" <pte### [at] yahoo com> wrote:
> For me, it's Corel Dream--> povray ---> blender --> povray
I'm curious what caused you to shift away from POV and then back. Just
broadening your rendering tool library?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
How Camp wrote:
| I've been monitoring the POV-Ray newsgroups for nearly a decade,
and I've seen a
| number of prolific users come and go. I'm curious what software
POV-Ray users
| tend to migrate toward after they 'move on'. Do most convert to
high-end
| render packages (I think H.E. Day did this), or is there another
open-source
| package that eventually steals away the POV community?
|
| I wonder if such users 'outgrow' POV-Ray as an artistic tool, or
whether they're
| mostly casualties of 'lack of time' syndrome (as I perpetually
seem to be).
|
| (Not that I'm advocating such an evolution. I've heard you can
catch the H1N1
| flu if you don't use POV-Ray regularly...)
|
Mostly, for me it's lack of time + a migration to Blender (I had
the intention of doing character animation for which Pov is woefully
unsuited, but Real Life (tm) intruded so much I haven't done much
with Blender either).
Jerome
- --
mailto:jeb### [at] freefr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeb### [at] jabberfr
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkn8DEUACgkQd0kWM4JG3k9aZQCffWFWNnTdI+xbg4iEZvzF19VU
PdYAn2NAjihIq/+ViYgyb1YPHGCHVSsu
=+lwe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"How Camp" <hac### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I've been monitoring the POV-Ray newsgroups for nearly a decade, and I've seen a
> number of prolific users come and go. I'm curious what software POV-Ray users
> tend to migrate toward after they 'move on'. Do most convert to high-end
> render packages (I think H.E. Day did this), or is there another open-source
> package that eventually steals away the POV community?
>
> I wonder if such users 'outgrow' POV-Ray as an artistic tool, or whether they're
> mostly casualties of 'lack of time' syndrome (as I perpetually seem to be).
>
> (Not that I'm advocating such an evolution. I've heard you can catch the H1N1
> flu if you don't use POV-Ray regularly...)
I'm not a "stolen child", but like to throw in my 2 cents as well, about why
(and how) I *am* using POV-Ray:
- It's free. No commercial tool can give me that :)
- Due to its textual interface, it doesn't distract me with stuff I haven't yet
toyed around with (nor with yet another 3D interface behaving in a proprietary
manner); so I can just perfectly leave such stuff aside until the time comes
for me to try and use it. Makes for a very adaptive learning curve.
- It's powerful. I cannot think of much you cannot do with it *already* (even
though some things may take time).
- It's portable. I can run quick test renders on my Windows machine, and have my
Linux QuadCore crunch away on the final renders.
- I'm typically using POV-Ray (A) as a render engine, (B) as a tool to assemble
a scene from pre-modelled objects and to fine-tune textures, and (C) as a tool
for auto-generating some geometry based on other objects (like the mattress in
the shot I postend recently). I rarely do straightforward CSG modelling; most
non-trivial objects in my scenes are modelled in Wings3D (very intuitive tool,
with a very good "beginner's mode", again making for a good learning curve!),
or 3rd party work typically modified using Wings3D or Poser.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
How Camp wrote:
> I've been monitoring the POV-Ray newsgroups for nearly a decade, and I've seen a
> number of prolific users come and go. I'm curious what software POV-Ray users
> tend to migrate toward after they 'move on'. Do most convert to high-end
> render packages (I think H.E. Day did this), or is there another open-source
> package that eventually steals away the POV community?
>
> I wonder if such users 'outgrow' POV-Ray as an artistic tool, or whether they're
> mostly casualties of 'lack of time' syndrome (as I perpetually seem to be).
>
> (Not that I'm advocating such an evolution. I've heard you can catch the H1N1
> flu if you don't use POV-Ray regularly...)
>
>
I think we can do little more than speculate on this. Gilles Tran was,
at the time, fairly open and specific about why he moved to another
software. He is a particularily 'pure' example in that his interests
and goals as an avowed amateur artist remained fairly consistent, but he
needed to explore a new approach. To the best of my recollection, he
said, in effect, that the POV 'process' that he, as much as anyone, had
embraced, had become as much a hindrance as a 'calling.' And that
certain limitations were standing in his way. He is an exploring kind
of guy. For other stars I suspect the picture had less purely to do
with software and would have been complicated at least as much by rl
considerations.
Myself, I still embrace Gilles' amateur-artist ideology. When I first
started working with POV I was excited and inspired by the POV creative
process and the sense of exploration and discovery toward achieving
professional results in free space. I doubted I could ever catch the
superstars, but I thought I might close the gap. It is still thrilling
to me to see POV attract some astonishing new talents, and to see the
spirit of exploration in free space continue. But the gap has widened.
The 'friction point' for innovation seems well out of my reach at this
point. I undersand little of the innovations that excite the top talents
now. But I still plod along. I still think it is a meaningful endeavor.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
> Myself, I still embrace Gilles' amateur-artist ideology. When I first
> started working with POV I was excited and inspired by the POV creative
> process and the sense of exploration and discovery toward achieving
> professional results in free space. I doubted I could ever catch the
> superstars, but I thought I might close the gap. It is still thrilling
> to me to see POV attract some astonishing new talents, and to see the
> spirit of exploration in free space continue. But the gap has widened.
> The 'friction point' for innovation seems well out of my reach at this
> point. I undersand little of the innovations that excite the top talents
> now. But I still plod along. I still think it is a meaningful endeavor.
Thanks for this, and all the other interesting replies. I think I tend to fall
into the same boat as Jim -- I find POV incredibly attractive from an
idealistic perspective. It offers a raw potential that's open and accessible
to everyone.
But I sense that the gap is widening as well, and somehow that faintly bothers
me, though I can't specifically say why...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"How Camp" <hac### [at] gmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:web.49fed1ad4eec845cc59235590@news.povray.org...
>
> Thanks for this, and all the other interesting replies. I think I tend to
> fall
> into the same boat as Jim -- I find POV incredibly attractive from an
> idealistic perspective. It offers a raw potential that's open and
> accessible
> to everyone.
>
> But I sense that the gap is widening as well, and somehow that faintly
> bothers
> me, though I can't specifically say why...
>
I am relieved to read how Jim has nicely wrapped up his personal experience
regarding POV for me too. I thought I was the only one :-)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"How Camp" <hac### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I wonder if such users 'outgrow' POV-Ray as an artistic tool, or whether they're
> mostly casualties of 'lack of time' syndrome (as I perpetually seem to be).
I enjoy doing character based animation, but I'm positively awful at organic
modeling, so I do a lot now with software where I can get and use pre-made
character content more easily (mostly I use Carrara with DAZ content). However,
POV is still a very important part of my arsenal. There are textures that I can
do in POV that I can't easily make elsewhere, and I make a lot of them in POV
to map onto meshes in other programs. As a long time programmer, I find the SDL
a much more intuitive way to work on a lot of things, especially calculating
motion paths, or doing physics based animation.
I kind of "think" in POV... I've been using it since it was in beta (version
0.98, IIRC). Carrara has an "isometric" camera, but until my brain internally
translates that to "orthographic" I can't picture what it does.
A lot of newer programs I've tried tend to make animations a little faster than
POV; I think that's mostly an issue with parsing the frames multiple times
(when I animate, I've got the clock variable stowed everywhere, it seems like).
For stills, I like using ambient occlusion and indirect lighting, and I can't
get the same results with POV (althought that may be me more than the
software...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Captain Jack" <Cap### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> "How Camp" <hac### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I kind of "think" in POV..
This is THE main reason that I keep coming back to POV-Ray. I can "doodle" in
the gui "push-me-pull-you" modelers and attempt various treatments of mesh
objects whose vertices have been generated by digitizing sensor data from the
"real" world, but POV is the only software that I'm familiar with wherein the
process of producing an image is so tightly interwoven with the process of
conceiving it. It is the only software I can "think in" to borrow Captain
Jack's apt phrase.
My long absences are most definitely RL instigated. I'm seriously considering
not backing up the RL any more so that I'll have a good excuse for replacing it
the next time it crashes. (I'm pretty sure that it's a hardware issue anyway.)
Best Regards,
Mike C.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot wrote:
> I am relieved to read how Jim has nicely wrapped up his personal experience
> regarding POV for me too. I thought I was the only one :-)
... except he may have thought of you as being on
the other side of the gap ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
news:web.49f9937ffb2e5f1ac59235590@news.povray.org...
> I've been monitoring the POV-Ray newsgroups for nearly a decade, and I've
> seen a
> number of prolific users come and go. I'm curious what software POV-Ray
> users
> tend to migrate toward after they 'move on'. Do most convert to high-end
> render packages (I think H.E. Day did this), or is there another
> open-source
> package that eventually steals away the POV community?
>
> I wonder if such users 'outgrow' POV-Ray as an artistic tool, or whether
> they're
> mostly casualties of 'lack of time' syndrome (as I perpetually seem to
> be).
Jim gave an accurate account of why I "left" POV-Ray so there's little to
add. Modelling complex objects in SDL is extremely challenging so at one
point I decided to move to a full 3D package where I could do more "drawing"
than coding (and my coding skills are just not good enough to really push
the envelope anyway, so I could feel the "gap" too). I first learned Blender
but even though I eventually managed to model and render things I didn't
like the experience, so I moved to a commercial package (Cinema 4D). I added
moved to Softimage + MentalRay.
Note that I'm still using POV-Ray once a week or so thanks to the people who
keep sending me questions as a TAG member!
G.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
