 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/21/2015 6:56 PM, clipka wrote:
> What is really needed is an effort from the POV-Ray team to either (a)
> add export functionality to POV-Ray, so that scenes can be exported in
> popular geometry formats that can then be imported into Blender, or (b)
> decouple POV-Ray's parser code from the main program, making it a
> library that can be used in other projects, like a Blender import module.
>
> Some people have also tried solution (c), which is programming a parser
> for POV-Ray files from scratch, but with so many quirks in POV-Ray's
> language it is virtually unavoidable that it behaves differently from
> the original, so I think that's not a viable approach in the long run.
>
>
> The POV-Ray team does have (b) comparatively high on the agenda, but
> we're not there yet, and in contrast to your work there is nothing fancy
> we can show right now, as it is all about modifying the underlying
> architecture.
Very interesting to read. :-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> Am 21.11.2015 um 15:14 schrieb LanuHum:
>
> > 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)
>
> You're doing a good job trying to bridge the gap between Blender and
> POV-Ray, but there's one thing you can't accomplish, which Anthony
> expressed discontent about:
>
> Blender can't import POV-Ray geometry.
>
> As a matter of fact, in a strict sense, Blender can't /import/ anything
> from POV-Ray at all. It is possible to paste POV-Ray code snippets into
> Blender scenes, but they remain POV-Ray code snippets; Blender has no
> idea what they mean, and can't do anything with them except feed them
> back to POV-Ray.
>
> Because Blender can't import POV-Ray geometry, its cloth simulation
> can't be used for existing POV-Ray scenes.
>
> It is not your fault that this is still impossible; as a matter of fact,
> it is fundamentally impossible (well, actually just highly infeasible)
> to solve this issue at the Blender side.
>
> What is really needed is an effort from the POV-Ray team to either (a)
> add export functionality to POV-Ray, so that scenes can be exported in
> popular geometry formats that can then be imported into Blender, or (b)
> decouple POV-Ray's parser code from the main program, making it a
> library that can be used in other projects, like a Blender import module.
>
> Some people have also tried solution (c), which is programming a parser
> for POV-Ray files from scratch, but with so many quirks in POV-Ray's
> language it is virtually unavoidable that it behaves differently from
> the original, so I think that's not a viable approach in the long run.
>
>
> The POV-Ray team does have (b) comparatively high on the agenda, but
> we're not there yet, and in contrast to your work there is nothing fancy
> we can show right now, as it is all about modifying the underlying
> architecture.
Well. Russians speak: "We will dance from an oven"
We will forget the Blender.
There are means displaying Povray scene? OpenGL can draw Povray scene?
Or you created an image which present simulators isn't able to display?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/21/2015 8:02 PM, LanuHum wrote:
> Well. Russians speak: "We will dance from an oven"
Not as bloody as dancing on swords. (Scottish dance) ;-)
> We will forget the Blender.
> There are means displaying Povray scene? OpenGL can draw Povray scene?
Have a look at Blender3d. It uses OpenGL to display wireframe or shaded
views.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 21.11.2015 um 21:02 schrieb LanuHum:
> Well. Russians speak: "We will dance from an oven"
I have not the slightest idea what that saying means.
> We will forget the Blender.
> There are means displaying Povray scene? OpenGL can draw Povray scene?
Aside from POV-Ray itself, there are none that I know of. Some software,
such as Bishop3D, can handle a subset of POV-Ray's syntax, but not all
of it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 21.11.2015 um 20:19 schrieb Stephen:
> On 11/21/2015 2:14 PM, LanuHum wrote:
>> You want to have the adequate editor for Povray?
>> My experience shows that you aren't interested in it!
>
> Some history:
>
> For a lot of people, PovRay was a "scripting" program and using a GUI
> was a cheat.
> Note. I am not saying that Clipka thinks that. But it is how PovRay grew
> up.
It all depends on whether you view the creation of a scene as an
intellectual challenge or just a means to an end.
POV-Ray with its extensive scripting language can cater to both, but in
the former case using GUI modelling software must indeed be considered
cheating, while in the latter case it must be considered one of the most
rational things to do.
I consider both approaches valid in and of themselves.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/21/2015 10:06 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 21.11.2015 um 20:19 schrieb Stephen:
>> On 11/21/2015 2:14 PM, LanuHum wrote:
>>> You want to have the adequate editor for Povray?
>>> My experience shows that you aren't interested in it!
>>
>> Some history:
>>
>> For a lot of people, PovRay was a "scripting" program and using a GUI
>> was a cheat.
>> Note. I am not saying that Clipka thinks that. But it is how PovRay grew
>> up.
>
> It all depends on whether you view the creation of a scene as an
> intellectual challenge or just a means to an end.
>
That, I think, is the crux of the matter.
> POV-Ray with its extensive scripting language can cater to both, but in
> the former case using GUI modelling software must indeed be considered
> cheating,
That is certainly how the "pure coders" came across.
while in the latter case it must be considered one of the most
> rational things to do.
>
Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before
breakfast. ;-)
I prefer using a GUI so that I can visualise the scene. The intellectual
challenge comes from trying to shoehorn the correct code into the modeller.
> I consider both approaches valid in and of themselves.
>
So do I and I must say that, IIRC, you have never said "RTFM" which was
a favourite rejoinder to newbies when I started using PovRay.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2015-11-21 14:06, clipka wrote:
> It all depends on whether you view the creation of a scene as an
> intellectual challenge or just a means to an end.
>
> POV-Ray with its extensive scripting language can cater to both, but in
> the former case using GUI modelling software must indeed be considered
> cheating, while in the latter case it must be considered one of the most
> rational things to do.
I vote for the latter. I care about the end result. If a modeller can
help me get there faster and/or easier, that's a good thing. :)
Todd
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 21.11.2015 um 23:25 schrieb Stephen:
> So do I and I must say that, IIRC, you have never said "RTFM" which was
> a favourite rejoinder to newbies when I started using PovRay.
Must have been a nasty time then.
I do indeed try to either be helpful or STFU. Nobody can convince me
that they know it's in the manual but can't give /any/ other helpful
information off the top of their head, even if it's just a keyword to
look up in the index.
Also, I've heard people argue that, simply put, to ask others means to
waste their time. I disagree there: If you know zilch about some topic,
then you will also be poor and inefficient at finding, and assessing the
quality of, pointers to more information about the topic; this is true
even if you spend a lot of time searching: While this may hone your
general skill of looking up information, the searching in and of itself
adds little to nothing to your skill of looking up information about
that particular topic; it is only when your search is successful, and
you take in quality information about the topic, that you get a
significant boost in your search skill regarding the topic.
Thus, if I know a lot about the topic, it would actually be a waste of
our combined time if I did /not/ assist you in digging up relevant
information. Of course my assistance means that I lose some time; but
you win a lot more, and I hope that you -- or someone else -- will
return the favor sooner or later.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/22/2015 12:25 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 21.11.2015 um 23:25 schrieb Stephen:
>
>> So do I and I must say that, IIRC, you have never said "RTFM" which was
>> a favourite rejoinder to newbies when I started using PovRay.
>
> Must have been a nasty time then.
>
Nasty is, maybe too strong a word. I would say.
The attitude back then was more "We will give you help to find the
solution but don't expect us to give the solution."
Not everyone of course, thank goodness. :-)
I agree with what you wrote below.
> I do indeed try to either be helpful or STFU. Nobody can convince me
> that they know it's in the manual but can't give /any/ other helpful
> information off the top of their head, even if it's just a keyword to
> look up in the index.
>
> Also, I've heard people argue that, simply put, to ask others means to
> waste their time. I disagree there: If you know zilch about some topic,
> then you will also be poor and inefficient at finding, and assessing the
> quality of, pointers to more information about the topic; this is true
> even if you spend a lot of time searching: While this may hone your
> general skill of looking up information, the searching in and of itself
> adds little to nothing to your skill of looking up information about
> that particular topic; it is only when your search is successful, and
> you take in quality information about the topic, that you get a
> significant boost in your search skill regarding the topic.
>
> Thus, if I know a lot about the topic, it would actually be a waste of
> our combined time if I did /not/ assist you in digging up relevant
> information. Of course my assistance means that I lose some time; but
> you win a lot more, and I hope that you -- or someone else -- will
> return the favor sooner or later.
>
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I join my agreement to Stephen's.
I believe POV-Ray has come a long way from those days.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
