 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen Klebs <skl### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> Another trick: If you're using the standard up y perspective camera, by adding:
> right x*image_width/image_height
> to the camera statement, it will adapt to whatever aspect ratio you choose.
There are several reasons why you don't want to do that.
http://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:Language_Questions_and_Tips#Topic_19
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Many thanks to your numerous replies!
But it did not work out. I render with Width=1280 Height=1024.
Btw: it looks quite spherical at the first glance, but if you measure you see
cleary that it is an egg!!
any other ideas?
thanks!
PS:I know that spheres which are not centered will become ellipses when
projected, but my sphere is perfectly centered.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> There are several reasons why you don't want to do that.
>
> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:Language_Questions_and_Tips#Topic_19
Did you write that FAQ? You seem to promote it an awful lot. It also seems
to assume you've already completed your scene, using "right
x*image_width/image_height" is very useful whilst developing a scene, as it
saves you having to adjust the camera block each time you want to render at
a different aspect (I assume nearly everyone renders to square pixels).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> But it did not work out. I render with Width=1280 Height=1024.
> Btw: it looks quite spherical at the first glance, but if you measure you
> see
> cleary that it is an egg!!
>
> any other ideas?
How are you measuring the dimensions of the sphere?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 07/12/2010 14:37, daedalouse a écrit :
> But it did not work out. I render with Width=1280 Height=1024.
If you are rendering the scene at the root of the thread, it cannot work
with +W1280 +H1024
1280 / 1024 is a 5:4 ratio.
Default (3.6) ratio is 4:3;
No Cigare!
You need (notice, 1 more line!):
#include "colors.inc"
#include "stones.inc"
#include "woods.inc"
#include "textures.inc"
background { color White}
camera {
location <50,0,0>
right x*image_width/image_height
look_at <0,0,0>}
light_source {
<20, 0, 0> color White
}
sphere {
<0,0,0> , 21
pigment {
color rgbt <1,1,1,0.7> }}
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.<br/>
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?<br/>
A: Top-posting.<br/>
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> There are several reasons why you don't want to do that.
>>
>> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:Language_Questions_and_Tips#Topic_19
>>
>
> Did you write that FAQ? You seem to promote it an awful lot. It also
> seems to assume you've already completed your scene, using "right
> x*image_width/image_height" is very useful whilst developing a scene, as
> it saves you having to adjust the camera block each time you want to
> render at a different aspect (I assume nearly everyone renders to square
> pixels).
>
>
As long as only YOU render a scene, then, it's ok.
If you create your scene and you plan to have it rendered at various
aspect ratio, then it's also workable. You made it so that it's complete
even if parts are not visible, and it's modeled outside the visible area.
If you create a scene using a specific aspect ratio and publish it, then
it's not ok anymore.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> As long as only YOU render a scene, then, it's ok.
> If you create your scene and you plan to have it rendered at various
> aspect ratio, then it's also workable. You made it so that it's complete
> even if parts are not visible, and it's modeled outside the visible area.
Sure.
> If you create a scene using a specific aspect ratio and publish it, then
> it's not ok anymore.
The problem is though the alternative is also not ok (but in a different
way). In extreme cases it's obvious, but if someone renders a 1280x1024
desktop wallpaper at 1600x1200 it might not be obvious things are a little
distorted. Currently as scene-author you need to decide which behaviour you
prefer when your scene gets rendered at a different aspect ratio (even if
you're rendering it yourself, eg for different monitors).
As has been discussed many times here before, it would be nice for the scene
author to have a little more control over the aspect ratio the scene gets
rendered at, and for the person starting the render to choose what to do in
case of a mismatch.
BTW the point in the FAQ about the "angle" keyword is clutching at straws,
if you're already using the image_width and image_height variables, then
just use them in the angle statement as well if you want to control the FOV
differently.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 08.12.2010 09:40, schrieb scott:
>> If you create a scene using a specific aspect ratio and publish it,
>> then it's not ok anymore.
>
> The problem is though the alternative is also not ok (but in a different
> way). In extreme cases it's obvious, but if someone renders a 1280x1024
> desktop wallpaper at 1600x1200 it might not be obvious things are a
> little distorted. Currently as scene-author you need to decide which
> behaviour you prefer when your scene gets rendered at a different aspect
> ratio (even if you're rendering it yourself, eg for different monitors).
This topic has been discussed over and over and over again - so rather
than discuss what is the best approach to solve the issue with the tools
available, I propose to fast-forward the discussion to the point where
POV-Ray's current toolbox for handling aspect ratio issues is found to
be incomplete.
See http://bugs.povray.org/task/85 for information on feature proposals
to mitigate this issue.
For the time being, my personal recommendation for people like me who
don't want to bother much about aspect ratio is to use the famous
image_width/image_height approach, irregardless of what that
equally-famous but somewhat outdated FAQ recommends - because chances
are they won't be rendering to non-square-pixel targets, nor be too
outraged if someone happened to render their scene at a "wrong" aspect
ratio.
For all those who want their scenes to be "aspect-ratio safe", I'd
suggest to use a simple workaround like:
#define AspectRatio = 4/3;
camera {
up y/AspectRatio
right x
#if (image_width/image_height <> AspectRatio)
#warning "Unexpected aspect ratio.\n"
#error "Comment out this line if you know what you are doing.\n"
#end
}
And finally, for people who want to be constructive about this issue,
I'd suggest picking up the glove to write a macro library to help
dealing with aspect ratio.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 07.12.2010 15:20, schrieb Le_Forgeron:
> Le 07/12/2010 14:37, daedalouse a écrit :
>> But it did not work out. I render with Width=1280 Height=1024.
>
> If you are rendering the scene at the root of the thread, it cannot work
> with +W1280 +H1024
>
> 1280 / 1024 is a 5:4 ratio.
> Default (3.6) ratio is 4:3;
> No Cigare!
Actually, 3.6 (and also 3.7, as of beta 40) defaults to an aspect ratio
of 1.330 : 1, which is almost but not quite 4:3...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
well...yes, my fault :-)
1280 / 1024 = 5/4 != 4/3 ^^
right x*image_width/image_height
did the trick.
Thanks, a lot
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
