 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
But, IIRC, it won't be included in POV 3.5. The thread was about features
which aren't going to be included in the official version of pov.
"Chris Huff" <chr### [at] mac com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:chr### [at] netplexaussieorg...
> In article <3b73b3b2@news.povray.org>, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom>
> wrote:
>
> > Post Processing is redundant?!
>
> Who said anything about post processing?
> Thorsten only said redundant features (such as text object alignment)
> probably won't be included, which makes perfect sense. The post_process
> patch hadn't even been mentioned in this thread before your message.
>
> --
> 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JRG <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
: But, IIRC, it won't be included in POV 3.5. The thread was about features
: which aren't going to be included in the official version of pov.
But the reason for not including post-processing is not that it's redundant.
Redundancy is not the only reason for excluding features.
--
#macro N(D,I)#if(I<6)cylinder{M()#local D[I]=div(D[I],104);M().5,2pigment{
rgb M()}}N(D,(D[I]>99?I:I+1))#end#end#macro M()<mod(D[I],13)-6,mod(div(D[I
],13),8)-3,10>#end blob{N(array[6]{11117333955,
7382340,3358,3900569407,970,4254934330},0)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3b7528fc@news.povray.org>, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom>
wrote:
> But, IIRC, it won't be included in POV 3.5. The thread was about features
> which aren't going to be included in the official version of pov.
Nope, Thorsten quite clearly was talking about MegaPOV.
And the post_process feature won't be included in POV 3.5, not because
it is redundant, but because it simply wasn't ready. Nobody said it
wasn't going to be in MegaPOV either.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"JRG" wrote:
> Yet I can't understand why post_process won't be included
> (but I'm sure you'll enlighten me ;) ).
The current post_process is a mess IMHO.
The syntax for the various effects vary greatly, many of the effects aren't
resolution independent, and there is no way to create user-defined filters,
so the user is stuck with the filters available.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated June 26)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Good to know, but that's just what I was saying.
As an aside: was that bug concerning sphere-sweep and radiosity fixed?
--
Jonathan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JRG <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
: As an aside: was that bug concerning sphere-sweep and radiosity fixed?
Which bug?
--
#macro N(D,I)#if(I<6)cylinder{M()#local D[I]=div(D[I],104);M().5,2pigment{
rgb M()}}N(D,(D[I]>99?I:I+1))#end#end#macro M()<mod(D[I],13)-6,mod(div(D[I
],13),8)-3,10>#end blob{N(array[6]{11117333955,
7382340,3358,3900569407,970,4254934330},0)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3b766cc8@news.povray.org> , "Rune" <run### [at] mobilixnetdk>
wrote:
> The current post_process is a mess IMHO.
Yes it is :-(
> The syntax for the various effects vary greatly, many of the effects aren't
> resolution independent, and there is no way to create user-defined filters,
> so the user is stuck with the filters available.
Am I the only person who has the impression it is also a convenient way to
get around the post-processing rules of the IRTC? ;-)
Anyway, IMO a much better solution would be to write the additional data to
a file and then let users post-process it outside POV-Ray. (How exactly
this would be done is not the point here.)
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thorsten Froehlich" wrote:
> Anyway, IMO a much better solution would be to write
> the additional data to a file and then let users
> post-process it outside POV-Ray.
I agree.
However, how many times larger would such a file be than a regular image? I
mean, floating point unclipped values for both color, normal, depth, etc.
could take up quite some space...
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated June 26)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3b768062@news.povray.org>,
"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> Am I the only person who has the impression it is also a convenient way to
> get around the post-processing rules of the IRTC? ;-)
I don't think it is. I always thought the rules against post-processing
were to avoid "hand editing"...not stuff like gamma adjustment or focal
blur.
> Anyway, IMO a much better solution would be to write the additional data to
> a file and then let users post-process it outside POV-Ray. (How exactly
> this would be done is not the point here.)
This would be impossible (or just unnecessarily difficult) for most
people to make any use of, and a real pain for animation or for
post_process's controlled by the POV scene. I don't know of any standard
formats for this kind of data or software for dealing with it, users
would have to write their own or rely on others...and many of them would
be far more difficult to write independant of POV.
--
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 <3b768325@news.povray.org> , "Rune" <run### [at] mobilixnetdk>
wrote:
> However, how many times larger would such a file be than a regular image? I
> mean, floating point unclipped values for both color, normal, depth, etc.
> could take up quite some space...
Well, it would be better to hold all the data on disk rather than in memory
(!!!) as it is now...
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
