On 28/07/2020 03:39, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Suppose that Stephen takes it upon himself to volunteer to do some amazing mesh
> work with all the breast-jiggle that anyone could ever hope to see, and every
> facet of his project is POV-Ray this and POV-Ray that....
> I'm sure some special little snowflake will be ALL OVER him about what he can
> and cannot do.

Then Stephen would tell the little prude to FO and read the disclaimer 
at the top of the project.*
You actually picked a topic I have a bee in my bonnet about. :)
Removing nipples and male genitalia because they think they are obscene. 
Gets on my goat.

Generally I self sensor myself over these things. A case in point is 
with the Blender Stop Motion addon. I have been testing it with mesh 
sequences that for speed I use nude poser models. I have not offered the 
developer those meshes as he lives in SLC and I am wary of offending him.
Thanks for reminding me. I need to test the latest version with a 
complex set of OBJ files that contain body, knickers and top.


> Now maybe he CAN, and there's jack that anyone can do about it.

Except not use it.

> But I'm proposing that your average person might not be so assertive in their
> grabbing what they perceive is someone else's bull by the horns and leading it
> off to a livestock show where they show it off.

If I did that project and released it. It would be up to the user to do 
what they wanted with it and I would have no reason to complain. I might 
not like it but it would be out of my hands.

Anyway an option would be to cover the offending parts with a top which 
itself would be animated in Poser.

* I have lived in the world, been to sea and go for the throat in a rammy.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

hi,

Chris Cason <del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> wrote:
> Just a followup to say I haven't forgotten I need to reply to a few
> messages here where I promised a followup. My 'free' time tends to come
> in fits and bursts and at the moment I'm not able to spend a lot of time
> here. Please be patient.

(thanks)


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message

hi,

Chris Cason <del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> wrote:
> Just a followup to say I haven't forgotten I need to reply to a few
> messages here where I promised a followup. My 'free' time tends to come
> in fits and bursts and at the moment I'm not able to spend a lot of time
> here. Please be patient.

great, there's news in the news section, and the HOF images change.  (it feels
... less abandoned.  thanks)


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message

"jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:

> great, there's news in the news section, and the HOF images change.  (it feels
> ... less abandoned.  thanks)

Something in the news section (2 years old) that I think we could use over here
is
"Call for Participation"

http://www.realtimerendering.com/raytracinggems/rtg2/index.html

We invite articles on the following topics:

Basic ray tracing algorithms (intersection testing, spatial data structures,
etc.)
Unified lighting schemes
Shadows, reflections, ambient occlusion, etc.
Reconstruction, denoising, and filtering
Rasterization and ray tracing hybrids
Particles, volumetrics, and hair
Level of detail (geometric, material, and texture)
Animation schemes
Global Illumination
Occlusion Culling
Materials and BRDFs
Efficiency and best practices
Non-graphics applications (audio, collision, physics, etc.)
Virtual Reality (VR/AR/XR/MR)
Deep learning
....and any other notable work related to ray tracing
Articles will be primarily judged on practical utility. Though longer articles
with novel results are welcome, short practical articles with battle-tested
techniques are preferred and highly encouraged.


I have learned a lot from many people here on the forums and through contacting
people in academia and industry who have been kind enough to take the time to
correspond and add to my knowledge of many interesting topics.

There are a lot of topics covered in the above list that I and others have
requested or at least alluded to, and some have been worked on and developed to
some extent by the very busy folks here in our little corner of the internet.

Perhaps we could add a similar page to the POV-Ray HOME, and "seed" it with some
existing material simply written up a bit more formally as an article addressing
a specific topic.
A secondary benefit of doing this would be to invite material from academics,
hobbyists, and professionals, and provide a nice and convenient reason to
request the use of material they may already have published elsewhere.

This could also function as a mechanism to find qualified people who may have an
interest in POV-Ray and who could do some further developmental work.   ;)

Post a reply to this message

Op 09/08/2020 om 20:52 schreef Bald Eagle:
> "jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> 
>> great, there's news in the news section, and the HOF images change.  (it feels
>> ... less abandoned.  thanks)
> 
> Something in the news section (2 years old) that I think we could use over here
> is
> "Call for Participation"
> 
> http://www.realtimerendering.com/raytracinggems/rtg2/index.html
> 
> We invite articles on the following topics:
> 
> Basic ray tracing algorithms (intersection testing, spatial data structures,
> etc.)
> Unified lighting schemes
> Shadows, reflections, ambient occlusion, etc.
> Reconstruction, denoising, and filtering
> Rasterization and ray tracing hybrids
> Particles, volumetrics, and hair
> Level of detail (geometric, material, and texture)
> Animation schemes
> Global Illumination
> Occlusion Culling
> Materials and BRDFs
> Efficiency and best practices
> Non-graphics applications (audio, collision, physics, etc.)
> Virtual Reality (VR/AR/XR/MR)
> Deep learning
> ....and any other notable work related to ray tracing
> Articles will be primarily judged on practical utility. Though longer articles
> with novel results are welcome, short practical articles with battle-tested
> techniques are preferred and highly encouraged.
> 
> 
> I have learned a lot from many people here on the forums and through contacting
> people in academia and industry who have been kind enough to take the time to
> correspond and add to my knowledge of many interesting topics.
> 
> There are a lot of topics covered in the above list that I and others have
> requested or at least alluded to, and some have been worked on and developed to
> some extent by the very busy folks here in our little corner of the internet.
> 
> Perhaps we could add a similar page to the POV-Ray HOME, and "seed" it with some
> existing material simply written up a bit more formally as an article addressing
> a specific topic.
> A secondary benefit of doing this would be to invite material from academics,
> hobbyists, and professionals, and provide a nice and convenient reason to
> request the use of material they may already have published elsewhere.
> 
> This could also function as a mechanism to find qualified people who may have an
> interest in POV-Ray and who could do some further developmental work.   ;)
> 

This seems to be a very good starting point indeed. I have been 
pondering the issues we are faced and have been wondering if we, as end 
users, could not contribute more readily one way or another our own 
POV-Ray experience accumulated over the years, in short, comprehensive, 
pieces of text with simple (or less simple, for those who are able to) 
scenes. Most often we contribute through these ng's which is fine, but 
over the years much of the information is somehow lost or forgotten and 
I have noted several times that the same wheel is being invented over 
and over again. Personally, I am certainly willing to contribute in this 
way the things I have developed over the years and which may help 
beginners or more advanced parties. I am not versed in mathematical 
arcana and most of what I do is common-sense, straightforward, coding. I 
am sure however, that there could be a demand for it. I am not sure in 
what form this should be done and if this should be incorporated into 
the web site (I think it should), but I put the idea here for further 
discussion.

It is not my intention of course to revamp the content of sites like 
http://www.f-lohmueller.de/pov_tut/pov__eng.htm or 
http://www.econym.demon.co.uk/index.htm for instance. There is enough 
other stuff.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> but
> over the years much of the information is somehow lost or forgotten and
> I have noted several times that the same wheel is being invented over
> and over again.

Right.  I've noted that as well, and there are certainly more scene and include
files in the archives than I know what to do with.

> most of what I do is common-sense, straightforward, coding. I
> am sure however, that there could be a demand for it.

Most often I see the people with the most talent underappreciate and undervalue
themselves.  It's also often not "what" you do, but how you do it.  And most
often, if you have the initiative and stamina to do it at all.

> I am not sure in
> what form this should be done and if this should be incorporated into
> the web site

I've had write science articles, and have read a lot of patents --- usually one
starts out with a brief introduction (these are the basics of the heightfield)
does a short review of notable prior art (this can be a few sentences with
references/links, and then I would imagine in the present context, one might lay
out the stepwise development of a scene that uses a hf as terrain, how it gets
generated, how it gets modified and tweaked, and some of the tricks for
texturing it.
Then there may be a list of references and links that are of related interest or
further reading on the specific subject.

I would also say that articles reviewing past _unsolved_ issue may be of
interest as well - as this is instructive about how people approach the same
problem in many different ways, goes into the specifics of what has been tried,
why it doesn't work or how it falls short of the desired result, and sets out a
list of ideas that may have been pondered but not yet tried.
That way if someone has an interest in a similar subject, they will already know
that it doesn't work, and what the issues are in attempting to get it to.  It
also puts ideas and problem solving strategies out there for people to learn
from and acts as a seed for brainstorming and inspiration for derivative works.
(More clever readers may get frustrated by the failed attempt and be spurred to
show how it CAN be done   :D )

Lastly, and this is mostly here for completeness, would be articles that deal
with what _can't_ be done - and why.  This may help someone just starting a
scene from unproductively pursuing a doomed strategy.  It's also a good place to
discuss what scene coders probably do best - fake it with a workaround that's
good enough to fool the eye from the chosen perspective.  Many people may be
tempted to model the exact geometry of something, or a _whole_ something, when
simply a close approximation and some clever texturing with normals will do the
trick.   Billboarding.  Etc.

Check THIS out  :O
https://twitter.com/QTAnon1/status/1288270534493581314



Text / html in the usual sort of post would be good, but also maybe exporting it
to a PDF so it can be individually downloaded and archived might be a good idea
as well.  It would also look pretty professional, and outside sites could link
to the PDF thus generating traffic to - HERE.


There should probably be a poll soliciting what actual users would like to see
covered (and why), as well as a list of people they might like/hope to see
invited articles by.   (It's early and this is by no means an inclusive list)
Paul Bourke, Inigo Quilez, Tor Olav Kristensen, Jaime Vives Piqueres, Paul
Nylander, Robert McGregor, Ive, Norbert Kern, Gilles Tran, Christoph Hormann,
Samuel Benge ... and others which I may not even be aware of.

Post a reply to this message

Op 10/08/2020 om 13:19 schreef Bald Eagle:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> but
>> over the years much of the information is somehow lost or forgotten and
>> I have noted several times that the same wheel is being invented over
>> and over again.
> 
> Right.  I've noted that as well, and there are certainly more scene and include
> files in the archives than I know what to do with.
> 

Agreed.

>> most of what I do is common-sense, straightforward, coding. I
>> am sure however, that there could be a demand for it.
> 
> Most often I see the people with the most talent underappreciate and undervalue
> themselves.  It's also often not "what" you do, but how you do it.  And most
> often, if you have the initiative and stamina to do it at all.
> 

Agreed.

>> I am not sure in
>> what form this should be done and if this should be incorporated into
>> the web site
> 
> I've had write science articles, and have read a lot of patents --- usually one
> starts out with a brief introduction (these are the basics of the heightfield)
> does a short review of notable prior art (this can be a few sentences with
> references/links, and then I would imagine in the present context, one might lay
> out the stepwise development of a scene that uses a hf as terrain, how it gets
> generated, how it gets modified and tweaked, and some of the tricks for
> texturing it.
> Then there may be a list of references and links that are of related interest or
> further reading on the specific subject.
> 

I too have writing experience. I was musing about whether the 
contributions should be 'formal' or 'informal' (layout of text, code, 
images). I strongly feel it should be 'informal' as that would give the 
contributor the most freedom and - certainly - stimulation to present 
something to the community. At least, a low-key editing party would be 
advisable though, just to keep things within their proper limits. :-)

> I would also say that articles reviewing past _unsolved_ issue may be of
> interest as well - as this is instructive about how people approach the same
> problem in many different ways, goes into the specifics of what has been tried,
> why it doesn't work or how it falls short of the desired result, and sets out a
> list of ideas that may have been pondered but not yet tried.
> That way if someone has an interest in a similar subject, they will already know
> that it doesn't work, and what the issues are in attempting to get it to.  It
> also puts ideas and problem solving strategies out there for people to learn
> from and acts as a seed for brainstorming and inspiration for derivative works.
> (More clever readers may get frustrated by the failed attempt and be spurred to
> show how it CAN be done   :D )

Agreed.

> 
> Lastly, and this is mostly here for completeness, would be articles that deal
> with what _can't_ be done - and why.  This may help someone just starting a
> scene from unproductively pursuing a doomed strategy.  It's also a good place to
> discuss what scene coders probably do best - fake it with a workaround that's
> good enough to fool the eye from the chosen perspective.  Many people may be
> tempted to model the exact geometry of something, or a _whole_ something, when
> simply a close approximation and some clever texturing with normals will do the
> trick.   Billboarding.  Etc.
> 

My thoughts entirely.

> Check THIS out  :O
> https://twitter.com/QTAnon1/status/1288270534493581314
> 

Clever! :-)

> 
> 
> Text / html in the usual sort of post would be good, but also maybe exporting it
> to a PDF so it can be individually downloaded and archived might be a good idea
> as well.  It would also look pretty professional, and outside sites could link
> to the PDF thus generating traffic to - HERE.
> 

PDF would be most excellent indeed. It is the medium I most often use to 
produce and/or archive texts myself.

> 
> There should probably be a poll soliciting what actual users would like to see
> covered (and why), as well as a list of people they might like/hope to see
> invited articles by.   (It's early and this is by no means an inclusive list)
> Paul Bourke, Inigo Quilez, Tor Olav Kristensen, Jaime Vives Piqueres, Paul
> Nylander, Robert McGregor, Ive, Norbert Kern, Gilles Tran, Christoph Hormann,
> Samuel Benge ... and others which I may not even be aware of.
>

Absolutely. These people, and more, are essential. Some have moved on 
though, but their sites are often still available.

I believe that sites essential to the community, like those from 
Lohmueller, Mike Williams, Gilles Tran, Christoph Hormann, Jaime Vives 
Piqueres, etc, etc, should be showcased more proeminently on the POV-Ray 
website.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 08:31:42 +0200, Thomas de Groot wrote:

>> Text / html in the usual sort of post would be good, but also maybe
>> exporting it to a PDF so it can be individually downloaded and archived
>> might be a good idea as well.  It would also look pretty professional,
>> and outside sites could link to the PDF thus generating traffic to -
>> HERE.
>> 
>> 
> PDF would be most excellent indeed. It is the medium I most often use to
> produce and/or archive texts myself.

I don't entirely disagree, but PDF is not an open format, so from a "free 
software" perspective, would be strongly discouraged IIRC.  Providing it 
in a format that could be published in multiple formats, OTOH, would be a 
really good solution.

-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 11:46:42 -0400, Jim Henderson wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 08:31:42 +0200, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> 
>>> Text / html in the usual sort of post would be good, but also maybe
>>> exporting it to a PDF so it can be individually downloaded and
>>> archived might be a good idea as well.  It would also look pretty
>>> professional, and outside sites could link to the PDF thus generating
>>> traffic to - HERE.
>>> 
>>> 
>> PDF would be most excellent indeed. It is the medium I most often use
>> to produce and/or archive texts myself.
> 
> I don't entirely disagree, but PDF is not an open format, so from a
> "free software" perspective, would be strongly discouraged IIRC. 
> Providing it in a format that could be published in multiple formats,
> OTOH, would be a really good solution.

ePub would probably be a better choice, since that standard is completely 
open.



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

> > I don't entirely disagree, but PDF is not an open format, so from a
> > "free software" perspective, would be strongly discouraged IIRC.
> > Providing it in a format that could be published in multiple formats,
> > OTOH, would be a really good solution.
>
> ePub would probably be a better choice, since that standard is completely
> open.

https://extensions.libreoffice.org/en/extensions/show/writer2epub

done.

Post a reply to this message