 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/20/2015 8:10 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>
>> I am wrong? ;-)
>>
>
> No.
:-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Todd Carnes <tod### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> > On 2015-01-07 21:56, jhu wrote:
> > >> I find Blender to be a massive pain to use. I can't import my models into it
> > >> >from povray, which is the only place I ever create models, and the interface
is
> > >> >a clunky mass of mystery meat.
> >
> > > It's a clunky mess because you're not used to it. That will be the same no
> > > matter what program you use (AutoCAD, Maya, 3D Studio Max, etc.).
> > >
> >
> > That's such a lame excuse. It's a clunky mess because... It's a clunky mess.
> >
> > Blender's UI absolutely, positively sucks. Period.
>
> It's been worse.
>
> Also, from my experience most 3D UIs suck. And it doesn't help that they do so
> in entirely different ways.
>
>
> BTW, the fact that Blender -- like most other 3D modelling software -- can't
> import stuff from POV-Ray isn't any surprise either, given that POV-Ray uses (1)
> a vastly larger number of different geometric primitives (most 3D software can
> only handle triangle or polygon meshes) and (2) a non-trivial proprietary clunky
> mess of a full-fledged programming language for scene description (most 3D
> software only deals with plain lists of objects).
You want to have the adequate editor for Povray?
My experience shows that you aren't interested in it!
Blender? Yes, has problems, but Povray has no that it would be impossible to
present lists.
My notes allow to connect any material created by you, but to you isn't present
to this interest. What do you want? Blender can be built as the Python module.
Having desire it is possible to write own graphical representation, using import
bpy(import blender)
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/attachment/%3Cweb.56507a4164d920037a3e03fe0%40news.povray.org%3E/sansara.
jpg
Here it is possible to use all useful functions the blender.
Also:
kpovmodeller had long time of kde in linux.
https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/issues/15
What the Povray developers for support made?
I see falseness. Sorry, if I am mistaken.
You wait for professional programmers, but they aren't present. You could help
me, but you don't wish it. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2015-11-21 06:14, LanuHum wrote:
> You want to have the adequate editor for Povray?
> My experience shows that you aren't interested in it!
Bishop 3D & Wings 3D both export to POV-Ray.
As for your comments regarding kpovmodeler, the thread that is
referenced in that bug report is misleading at best.
For instance, it claims that the source has been updated to Qt5. That is
not true. In fact, the source is set up to compile for KDE 3 and Qt 4.
I have recently (yesterday) downloaded the so-called kpovmodeler-Qt5
source in hopes of reviving it, but it looks like it will NOT be an easy
task.
My hope is to get rid of all the KDE crap and make it a pure Qt 5 app,
but that's not something that will happen any time soon.
Todd
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
As an aside, Bishop 3D announced in September that they are going to
release their next version as open source software.
Perhaps, instead of worrying about long dead kpovmodeler, it might be
wiser if the community rallied around updating Bishop 3D.
Just my 2 cents,
Todd
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/21/2015 3:37 PM, Todd Carnes wrote:
> On 2015-11-21 06:14, LanuHum wrote:
>> You want to have the adequate editor for Povray?
>> My experience shows that you aren't interested in it!
>
> Bishop 3D & Wings 3D both export to POV-Ray.
>
Bishop 3D could also import a subset of Povray code. Which is very handy.
>
> Todd
>
> As an aside, Bishop 3D announced in September that they are going to release their
next version as open source software.
>
It was September last year that Hugo posted that announcement. Not heard
anything since. :-(
> Perhaps, instead of worrying about long dead kpovmodeler, it might be wiser if the
community rallied around updating Bishop 3D.
>
I think that LanuHum was just using kpovmodeler as an example.
If you remember in Pov-Ray's heydays there was a distinct lack of
interest in modellers. Many a Flame-war was started decrying them.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2015-11-21 09:10, Stephen wrote:
>
>>
>> Todd
>>
>> As an aside, Bishop 3D announced in September that they are going to
>> release their next version as open source software.
>>
>
> It was September last year that Hugo posted that announcement. Not heard
> anything since. :-(
Sorry, my mistake. I misread the date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2015-11-21 09:10, Stephen wrote:
> I think that LanuHum was just using kpovmodeler as an example.
> If you remember in Pov-Ray's heydays there was a distinct lack of
> interest in modellers. Many a Flame-war was started decrying them.
Perhaps, that's why we STILL haven't seen anything come of Moray?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/21/2015 5:33 PM, Todd Carnes wrote:
> On 2015-11-21 09:10, Stephen wrote:
>> I think that LanuHum was just using kpovmodeler as an example.
>> If you remember in Pov-Ray's heydays there was a distinct lack of
>> interest in modellers. Many a Flame-war was started decrying them.
>
> Perhaps, that's why we STILL haven't seen anything come of Moray?
It could be. Then there is also the cost (in man hours) of converting
propriety software to open source. That is why I am pleased that MR and
LanuHum are creating exporters for Blender. Then we can have an
integrated Mesh Editor for PovRay. :-)
> Sorry, my mistake. I misread the date.
Wishful thinking, I expect. :-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>
> I think that LanuHum was just using kpovmodeler as an example.
> If you remember in Pov-Ray's heydays there was a distinct lack of
> interest in modellers. Many a Flame-war was started decrying them.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Yes. This is example
My dear developers joke...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 11/21/2015 3:37 PM, Todd Carnes wrote:
> > On 2015-11-21 06:14, LanuHum wrote:
> >> You want to have the adequate editor for Povray?
> >> My experience shows that you aren't interested in it!
> >
> > Bishop 3D & Wings 3D both export to POV-Ray.
> >
>
> Bishop 3D could also import a subset of Povray code. Which is very handy.
>
>
>
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > As an aside, Bishop 3D announced in September that they are going to release their
next version as open source soft
ware.
> >
>
> It was September last year that Hugo posted that announcement. Not heard
> anything since. :-(
>
> > Perhaps, instead of worrying about long dead kpovmodeler, it might be wiser if the
community rallied around updatin
g Bishop 3D.
> >
>
> I think that LanuHum was just using kpovmodeler as an example.
> If you remember in Pov-Ray's heydays there was a distinct lack of
> interest in modellers. Many a Flame-war was started decrying them.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
There is no problem in Qt5
Qt4 will be supported very long
But it doesn't influence a situation
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
