 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote:
> Btw, you keep saying that the GPU could be used to speed up
ray-triangle
> intersection calculations, but what do you base this on?
Other people works like those I linked to?
> Raytracers, including POV-Ray, use complex container structures to
speed up
> ray-triangle intersection calculations (such as octrees or b-trees).
>
> How can the GPU be used to speed this up? AFAIK when rendering in the
> normal way, GPUs do not prune triangles like that, but instead all you
> send the GPU to render is splashed into the screen as-is.
You're thinking of the GPU as solely a game engine, not a programatic
processor.
> Now, would you kindly explain to me how the GPU can be used to speed up
> ray-triangle intersections of a scene with millions of triangles in a
> raytracer?
I'm sure you know Google, but out of the top of my head:
http://ompf.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=16
http://davibu.interfree.it/opencl/smallluxgpu/smallluxGPU.html
last one is implementing precisely ray-triangle intersections on GPU and
btrees as containers. Source code is GPL.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis escreveu:
> I'm sure you know Google, but out of the top of my head:
> http://ompf.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=16
> http://davibu.interfree.it/opencl/smallluxgpu/smallluxGPU.html
>
> last one is implementing precisely ray-triangle intersections on GPU and
> btrees as containers.
BVH to be more precise.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I'm sure you know Google, but out of the top of my head:
> http://ompf.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=16
> http://davibu.interfree.it/opencl/smallluxgpu/smallluxGPU.html
> last one is implementing precisely ray-triangle intersections on GPU and
> btrees as containers. Source code is GPL.
Well, since the code is ready, go ahead and integrate it in POV-Ray,
rather than whining about it. It's not like POV-Ray is closed-source.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> I'm sure you know Google, but out of the top of my head:
> http://ompf.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=16
> http://davibu.interfree.it/opencl/smallluxgpu/smallluxGPU.html
Funny, you mentioning using google when you seem to have ignored the
suggestion when I bring it up.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:35:47 -0500, nemesis wrote:
> The only explanation so far being thrown has been: "we don't want to
> speed up povray's ray-triangle intersections because it would make it
> much more useful to people outside our small geek niche and those people
> wouldn't be interested in using other povray features thus making us
> feel unloved".
Huh, you and I are reading different messages, then.
> Really, they can't stop talking how isosurfaces,
> textures and whatsoever would not be well-supported on GPU even though I
> agreed with that from the start and only hinted at triangles speed up.
And given the relatively small niche in the userbase who has hardware
that could do so, it doesn't seem reasonable to you to say "this is not a
good use of our developer's time"?
In any development project, there are good ideas that get put off or not
implemented due to resource constraints. This is one of those times.
Maybe the right kind of GPU hardware will become more pervasive and
someone will take this on, but until then, you'll just have to be
satisfied with the answer that's been given, which I'm quite *sure* isn't
"we want to keep the software slow", as you seem to think it is.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 03:28:00 -0200, nemesis wrote:
>>
>>> It was a hint for possible improvement.
>> Not really, no - it's been an ongoing obsession of yours, even in light
>> (pun not intended) of countless people who know a lot more about how the
>> software works patiently explaining why it's not practical.
>
> The only explanation so far being thrown has been: "[stuff i made up to prove my
point]".
I have stated my intention to look into this, and you keep ranting and
railing about how no one will listen; either with intent to demean those
who are trying in ways that you do not understand, or simply to troll.
You have gone beyond making a point and have wandered, intentionally or
not, into insulting the people who you expect to listen to you. So, at
this point, I must consider your opinion to be worthless.
Whether the GPU code you have pointed out proves useful or not, your
actual contribution has been negligible. When you have actual code, that
applies to POV-Ray specifically, and not just links to thinks you do not
understand but somehow would like to see POV-Ray do anyways, feel free
to contact me. Otherwise, stuff it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp escreveu:
> Well, since the code is ready, go ahead and integrate it in POV-Ray,
> rather than whining about it. It's not like POV-Ray is closed-source.
Thought it was a genuine question of yours. forget.
I'm not whining nor demanding povray to evolve, just thought people
around here would enjoy the idea that GPU's are finally getting ready to
boost raytracing, despite many years of such trumpeting here and
elsewhere.
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sabrina Kilian escreveu:
> I have stated my intention to look into this...
...and then proceeded to precisely put up with all those excuses about
non-triangle surfaces and all other povray features that have no such
use for a GPU. I thought you changed your mind.
I'm not ranting, nor whining, nor demanding anything. I just thought
most would here would be glad to know GPU's are finally there for
raytracing speedup. I was wrong, as always.
There's plenty of code you may find that relates to povray about general
raytracing features if you follow the links I provide. I can help with
any SQL coding if you want...
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Warp escreveu:
> > Well, since the code is ready, go ahead and integrate it in POV-Ray,
> > rather than whining about it. It's not like POV-Ray is closed-source.
> Thought it was a genuine question of yours. forget.
What did I say to deserve that? I said: You have POV-Ray, open source,
and you have a library to calculate ray-triangle intersections with the
GPU, open source. What stops you from integrating the latter in the former?
> I'm not whining nor demanding povray to evolve, just thought people
> around here would enjoy the idea that GPU's are finally getting ready to
> boost raytracing, despite many years of such trumpeting here and
> elsewhere.
Then go and do it.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> You have POV-Ray, open source,
> and you have a library to calculate ray-triangle intersections with the
> GPU, open source. What stops you from integrating the latter in the
> former?
GPL incompatibility with POV-Ray license?
(SCNR)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
