 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <1ev7iz0.14tmxh2178er60N%smellenbergh@skynet.be>,
sme### [at] skynet be (smellenbergh) wrote:
> Don't know what exactly you mean. I use CW 6.2 and I simply had to move
> the sources to a standard c++ console carbon project. I had to change
> some struct members name's (true and false) and add one or two includes.
I'm not quite sure what the problem was...the project didn't seem to see
some files. My second attempt didn't have any problems.
--
Christopher James Huff - chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <1ev7iz0.14tmxh2178er60N%smellenbergh@skynet.be>,
sme### [at] skynetbe (smellenbergh) wrote:
> > A command-line OS X version shouldn't be hard though...
> The program povslc? Normaly it should run onder OS X but I didn't test
> it.
I was talking about POVMan itself, though the povslc tool should be even
easier. I've done compiles of both the official version and MegaPOV,
POVMan shouldn't be much different.
And yes, gcc apparently produces very slow PowerPC code...I'm not going
to upgrade my CodeWarrior version though, so I'm stuck with the free
tools. Hopefully the compiler situation will improve soon...maybe the
MPW compilers could be ported, I understand they produced pretty good
code.
--
Christopher James Huff - chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thorsten Froehlich
Subject: Re: POVMan 0.71 available for MAC (carbon) [WAS Call for Mac programmers]
Date: 19 Jun 2001 07:21:12
Message: <3b2f35a8@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <chr### [at] povrayorg> , Chris Huff
<chr### [at] maccom> wrote:
> And yes, gcc apparently produces very slow PowerPC code...I'm not going
> to upgrade my CodeWarrior version though, so I'm stuck with the free
> tools. Hopefully the compiler situation will improve soon...maybe the
> MPW compilers could be ported, I understand they produced pretty good
> code.
They do. Further, IBM has its own set of Unix PowerPC compilers which
supposed to be even better. Not available for Mac OS X however :-(
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Vahur Krouverk
Subject: Re: POVMan 0.71 available for MAC (carbon) [WAS Call for Mac programmers]
Date: 19 Jun 2001 14:38:38
Message: <3B2F9CA2.FD0D6E80@comtrade.ee>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Huff wrote:
>
> It is a bit difficult to figure out exactly what is needed, it would be
> helpful if it was just one archive...and I haven't done any testing, I
> just got it to compile and verified that it ran.
Yes, me bad! With next version I try to correct it, things were out of
control a little bit with last version due to other matters.
> I will upload my compile here:
> http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/POVMan0714.sit
Thank You!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tom Stone <tom### [at] teliacom> wrote:
> I downloaded it, and then I checked the URL
> http://tofbouf.free.fr/clothray/download_en.html
> ..as suggested in the Read-me file.
> There I downloaded a few demo scenes from the tutorial pages named
> "drape.pov" and "nappe.pov".
> But both of them refused to render because POVMan didn't recognize the phrase
> "simcloth" in the demo scenes.
Hi Tom, glad you found your way to these newsgroups!
You should be able to use my latest build 0.714. I tested drape.pov and
it renders fine.
See a post in this group to find the link. I changed it to make sure
people get the right version.
> I'm using a Power Mac G3, system 9.0.4
A bit better than the old 68k machines right? :-) :-)
Yvo smellenbergh
--
e-mail:sme### [at] skynetbe
http://users.skynet.be/smellenbergh
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Vahur Krouverk <vkr### [at] comtradeee> wrote:
> Can You create version 0.74 (it contains Bouf's cloth patch + number of
> bug fixes, seems like people are interested in cloth patch)? Source code
> could be found in Bouf's homepage:
Did that!
Would it not be possible to make just one archive with the sources? It's
very confusing this way.
> > One note: I could not render the demo brick, the result wasn't good.
>
> I'm not sure, that I understand this. Was there error or was the output
> just bad? Can You post example output?
The output was black where you supposed to see the brick texture.
I add the file brick.slp produced with my compiler. Could you verify
this? I used the examples from the windows archive and I did not change
a thing.
; version 0.3
; shadername brick 180
; shadertype 0
; requires 118
; codesize 865
; numstrings 1
; uvused
; sym h float 108 1 1
; sym jagged float 60 1 0
; sym MHF float 79 1 1
; sym mortarthickness float 68 1 0
; sym w float 104 1 1
; sym BMWIDTH float 76 1 1
; sym raggedamp float 56 1 0
; sym ss float 93 1 1
; sym rowstaggervary float 85 1 1
; sym tt float 94 1 1
; sym jaggedfreq float 83 1 1
; sym MWF float 78 1 1
; sym sbrick float 96 1 1
; sym tbrick float 95 1 1
; sym bcolor color 109 1 1
; sym raggedfreq float 58 1 0
; sym whichbrick float 98 1 1
; sym scoord float 87 1 1
; sym brickheight float 66 1 0
; sym tcoord float 88 1 1
; sym edge1 float 105 1 1
; sym swidth float 81 1 1
; sym twidth float 82 1 1
; sym brickcolor color 49 1 0
; sym brickwidth float 64 1 0
; sym PP point 90 1 1
; sym pitting float 72 1 0
; sym brickvary float 62 1 0
; sym x0 float 106 1 1
; sym x1 float 107 1 1
; sym Ka float 45 1 0
; sym Kd float 46 1 0
; sym BMHEIGHT float 77 1 1
; sym Nf normal 115 1 1
; sym groovedepth float 75 1 0
; sym Ct color 112 1 1
; sym rowstagger float 86 1 1
; sym rowvary float 70 1 0
; sym mortarcolor color 52 1 0
; sym pockfrequency float 74 1 0
; const float <7.2> 103
; const float <11.4> 102
; const float <23.8> 101
; const float <5.15> 100
; const float <103> 97
; const float <0.2> 84
; const float <1e-05> 80
; const float <10> 73
; const float <0.01> 71
; const float <0.014> 67
; const float <0.07> 65
; const float <0.28> 63
; const float <0.3> 61
; const float <0.006> 59
; const float <12> 57
; const float <0.04> 55
; const float <0.1> 47
; const float <0.6> 48
; const string "rgb" 0
; const float <0.5> 69
; const float <1> 44
; const float <0> 89
; const float <2> 99
-
96 0 44 12 0 45 96 0 44 12 0 46 96 0 47 96
0 47 96 0 48 29 0 1 0 1 13 0 49 96 0 48
96 0 48 96 0 48 29 0 1 0 1 13 0 52 96 0
55 12 0 56 96 0 57 12 0 58 96 0 59 12 0 60
96 0 61 12 0 62 96 0 63 12 0 64 96 0 65 12
0 66 96 0 67 12 0 68 96 0 69 12 0 70 96 0
71 12 0 72 96 0 73 12 0 74 96 0 71 12 0 75
46 96 0 64 96 0 68 3 12 0 76 96 0 66 96 0
68 3 12 0 77 96 0 68 96 0 69 74 96 0 76 36
12 0 78 96 0 68 96 0 69 74 96 0 77 36 12 0
79 96 0 80 12 0 81 96 0 80 12 0 82 96 0 44
12 0 83 96 0 84 12 0 85 96 0 69 12 0 86 96
0 24 12 0 87 96 0 25 12 0 88 96 0 60 96 0
89 47 1 6 96 0 24 96 0 83 74 96 0 76 36 96
0 25 96 0 83 74 96 0 77 36 84 0 2 13 0 90
96 0 60 97 0 90 133 74 5 0 87 96 0 60 97 0
90 134 74 5 0 88 96 0 87 96 0 76 36 12 0 93
96 0 88 96 0 77 36 12 0 94 96 0 94 53 12 0
95 96 0 86 96 0 95 74 96 0 44 73 5 0 93 96
0 85 96 0 95 96 0 69 3 83 0 1 96 0 69 125
74 5 0 93 96 0 93 53 12 0 96 96 0 96 127 0
93 96 0 95 127 0 94 96 0 97 96 0 96 74 96 0
95 3 12 0 98 96 0 56 96 0 99 96 0 24 96 0
95 96 0 100 74 3 96 0 58 74 96 0 25 96 0 96
96 0 101 74 3 96 0 58 74 83 0 2 74 96 0 44
125 74 5 0 93 96 0 56 96 0 99 96 0 24 96 0
95 96 0 102 74 3 96 0 58 74 96 0 25 96 0 96
96 0 103 74 3 96 0 58 74 83 0 2 74 96 0 44
125 74 5 0 94 96 0 56 96 0 99 36 96 0 99 96
0 24 96 0 95 96 0 100 74 3 96 0 58 74 96 0
99 74 96 0 25 96 0 96 96 0 101 74 3 96 0 58
74 96 0 99 74 83 0 2 74 96 0 44 125 74 5 0
93 96 0 56 96 0 99 36 96 0 99 96 0 24 96 0
95 96 0 102 74 3 96 0 58 74 96 0 99 74 96 0
25 96 0 96 96 0 103 74 3 96 0 58 74 96 0 99
74 83 0 2 74 96 0 44 125 74 5 0 94 96 0 81
96 0 44 66 2 87 96 0 44 96 0 99 96 0 78 74
125 12 0 104 61 2 166 96 0 44 96 0 78 125 12 0
105 96 0 93 96 0 81 96 0 99 36 125 12 0 106 96
0 106 96 0 81 3 12 0 107 96 0 89 96 0 107 96
0 105 69 96 0 106 96 0 78 67 125 96 0 81 36 67
96 0 44 96 0 78 96 0 81 36 125 96 0 89 67 96
0 44 24 12 0 104 96 0 82 96 0 44 66 2 192 96
0 44 96 0 99 96 0 79 74 125 12 0 108 61 3 15
96 0 44 96 0 79 125 12 0 105 96 0 94 96 0 82
96 0 99 36 125 12 0 106 96 0 106 96 0 82 3 12
0 107 96 0 89 96 0 107 96 0 105 69 96 0 106 96
0 79 67 125 96 0 82 36 67 96 0 44 96 0 79 96
0 82 36 125 96 0 89 67 96 0 44 24 12 0 108 97
0 49 96 0 44 96 0 62 96 0 99 96 0 98 96 0
69 3 83 0 1 74 96 0 44 125 74 3 22 75 13 0
109 97 0 52 97 0 109 96 0 104 96 0 108 74 72 13
0 112 96 0 44 22 13 0 21 97 0 112 96 0 45 22
7 75 96 0 46 22 97 0 115 34 75 4 75 13 0 18
45
Yvo
--
e-mail:sme### [at] skynetbe
http://users.skynet.be/smellenbergh
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Vahur Krouverk
Subject: Re: POVMan 0.71 available for MAC (carbon) [WAS Call for Mac programmers]
Date: 19 Jun 2001 15:37:42
Message: <3B2FAA7A.4962CCD4@comtrade.ee>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Smellenbergh wrote:
>
> Did that!
Thank You!
> Would it not be possible to make just one archive with the sources? It's
> very confusing this way.
Yes, sure. Next version will exhibit certain improvement in this
direction. Hopefully :-)
> The output was black where you supposed to see the brick texture.
> I add the file brick.slp produced with my compiler. Could you verify
> this? I used the examples from the windows archive and I did not change
> a thing.
Compiler's output is OK, as expected: I had this problem too, and there
was something wrong in POV-Ray patch IIRC. Now I try to recall, what was
the solution (this was quite some time ago and my rcs archive is in old
computer's disk, which does not work right now).
Are other shader examples' outputs OK?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Tom Stone
Subject: Re: POVMan 0.71 available for MAC (carbon) [WAS Call for Mac programmers]
Date: 19 Jun 2001 16:47:12
Message: <3B2FBB66.C6EB2520@telia.com>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Smellenbergh wrote:
>
> Hi Tom, glad you found your way to these newsgroups!
> You should be able to use my latest build 0.714. I tested drape.pov and
> it renders fine.
>
I'm downloading it this very minute :-)
> > I'm using a Power Mac G3, system 9.0.4
> A bit better than the old 68k machines right? :-) :-)
>
Oh yes! The speed makes me dizzy. And I've got a fast connection to Internet now
also, so I've downloaded almost every movie from IRTC. It took 5 seconds to
download all of them.... no, not really - but it felt so compared with my old
computer :-)
However, I'm still using the old Performa 630 for writing and drawing, as it is so
damn comfortable. It is somewhat like a love affair with that one. :-)
By the way, do you, or any one else here, have any plans to make the mesh2 format
and UV-mapping practical for mac users? The theoretical possibility to use them
exists, but as here are no converters available, it is just features that are
annoying. It would be really nice to be able to use Poser models in MacMegaPov.
As you know, I've been playing with REALbasic, and might make a try to do a mac
converter for those formats myself.
But as I'm a complete idiot when it comes to understanding code examples in C, I
don't really believe that my efforts will produce anything useful.
Like last week. I was irritated that I was unable to make anything else than
256-level Heighfields, and the Docs mention of a special TGA and PPM format for
65536 level Heightfields have always taunted me. So I thought that I would try to
make an utility to smooth and/or interpolate 256-level files into 65536-level
TGAs.
So, I read the documentation to learn how those files were constructed. Two days
of constant study later, I still didn't understand anything more than before.
Then finally, as my visual sense is better than my analytic, I did a test render
with HF_Gray_16 output to a TGA. And opened it in PhotoShop and looked at the
Channels. And BINGO, I instantly understood how those files is designed - and 30
minutes later my conversion utility in RB was ready to be tested.
The testscenes with my own special heightfields rendered beautifully :-)
Smoothing works okey, but I need to find a better method for the interpolation.
Sorry for the length of this messy and irrelevant posting, but as a newcomer I
hope that I'm allowed a few mistakes.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
