 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I know finish_maps have been asked before, but how come there is no patch that has a
finish_map? Is it really that hard to implement?
And what about layered textures with patterned textures? Why can't I use a patterned
texture as a layer in layered textures? I can't believe it's really hard to implement
this, but then I don't understand why MegaPov doesn't have it...?
cu!
--
camera{location-z*3}#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*(C/50)#end#macro L(b,e,k,l)#local C=0
;#while(C<50)sphere{G(b,e),.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1
;#end#end L(y-x,y,x,x+y)L(y,-x-y,x+y,y)L(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)L(-y,y,y+z,x+y)L(0,x+y,
<.5,1,.5>,x)L(0,x-y,<.5,1,.5>,x) // ZK http://www.povplace.be.tf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> this, but then I don't understand why MegaPov doesn't have it...?
Some MegaPOV people are probably focusing on finishing 3.5 & the rest
of us are probably waiting for it to be finished so we can base patches on
the latest & greatest code.
Seeya,
Pabs
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This feature sounds to me just like another "nice but pretty useless"
feature, as it can be achieved by other (often more versatile) means.
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > this, but then I don't understand why MegaPov doesn't have it...?
> Some MegaPOV people are probably focusing on finishing 3.5 & the rest
> of us are probably waiting for it to be finished so we can base patches on
> the latest & greatest code.
Hmmm, my actual question was: many people wanted finish_maps for a very long time,
even
before MegaPov existed. And yet it isn't part of MegaPov. I wonder why. Is it hard
to
implement?
cu!
--
camera{location-z*3}#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*(C/50)#end#macro L(b,e,k,l)#local C=0
;#while(C<50)sphere{G(b,e),.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1
;#end#end L(y-x,y,x,x+y)L(y,-x-y,x+y,y)L(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)L(-y,y,y+z,x+y)L(0,x+y,
<.5,1,.5>,x)L(0,x-y,<.5,1,.5>,x) // ZK http://www.povplace.be.tf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> This feature sounds to me just like another "nice but pretty useless"
> feature, as it can be achieved by other (often more versatile) means.
Actually, it don't think it is. Finish_maps can be achieved using texture_maps, but
then
you couldn't use layered textures anymore. And maybe there would be a workaround for
this, but IMHO it really is that: a workaround and not a more versatile solution.
And if it was just a "nice but pretty useless" feature: then why do we have
pigment_maps
and normal_maps, but no finish_maps? I think you could achieve the effects of a
pigment_map with a (complicated) texture_map, so saying that finish_maps are pretty
useless would be the same as saying pigment_maps are pretty useless, and I don't think
many people would agree.
cu!
--
camera{location-z*3}#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*(C/50)#end#macro L(b,e,k,l)#local C=0
;#while(C<50)sphere{G(b,e),.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1
;#end#end L(y-x,y,x,x+y)L(y,-x-y,x+y,y)L(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)L(-y,y,y+z,x+y)L(0,x+y,
<.5,1,.5>,x)L(0,x-y,<.5,1,.5>,x) // ZK http://www.povplace.be.tf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002 14:39:26 +0100, Zeger Knaepen wrote:
>> > this, but then I don't understand why MegaPov doesn't have it...?
>> Some MegaPOV people are probably focusing on finishing 3.5 & the rest
>> of us are probably waiting for it to be finished so we can base patches on
>> the latest & greatest code.
> Hmmm, my actual question was: many people wanted finish_maps for a very long time,
even
> before MegaPov existed. And yet it isn't part of MegaPov. I wonder why. Is it
hard to
> implement?
I wonder why you wonder. Perhaps it's because the people who want it and
the people who would implement it aren't the same people. The patches that
are in MegaPOV, and to some extent the features that are in POV itself, are
not there because some user or group of users wanted them. They're there
because some programmer thought they'd be useful, or fun to implement, or
interesting to play with.
--
#macro R(L P)sphere{L F}cylinder{L P F}#end#macro P(V)merge{R(z+a z)R(-z a-z)R(a
-z-z-z a+z)torus{1F clipped_by{plane{a 0}}}translate V}#end#macro Z(a F T)merge{
P(z+a)P(z-a)R(-z-z-x a)pigment{rgbt 1}hollow interior{media{emission T}}finish{
reflection.1}}#end Z(-x-x.2y)Z(-x-x.4x)camera{location z*-10rotate x*90}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I wonder why you wonder. Perhaps it's because the people who want it and
> the people who would implement it aren't the same people. The patches that
> are in MegaPOV, and to some extent the features that are in POV itself, are
> not there because some user or group of users wanted them. They're there
> because some programmer thought they'd be useful, or fun to implement, or
> interesting to play with.
hmmm, you've got a point there :)
cu!
--
camera{location-z*3}#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*(C/50)#end#macro L(b,e,k,l)#local C=0
;#while(C<50)sphere{G(b,e),.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1
;#end#end L(y-x,y,x,x+y)L(y,-x-y,x+y,y)L(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)L(-y,y,y+z,x+y)L(0,x+y,
<.5,1,.5>,x)L(0,x-y,<.5,1,.5>,x) // ZK http://www.povplace.be.tf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Zeger Knaepen" <zeg### [at] student kuleuvenacbe> wrote:
> And if it was just a "nice but pretty useless" feature: then why do we have
pigment_maps
> and normal_maps, but no finish_maps?
You would need a map for every property of the finish-block ...
--
#macro J(N A)#local a=mod(N 3);#local W=<int(mod(A,4)*2)int(-A/4)9>*2;#if
(!mod(a 2))sphere{W,2,2pigment{color rgb<a*5A/2W.x/A*5>}}#if(a<1)sphere{W
+<2,0>2 2pigment{color rgb<a*10A 10>}}#end#end#if(N>3)J(int(N/3)A+1)#end#
end blob{J(29229171 0)threshold 1translate<-6 3>}/******Jan Walzer******/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thorsten Froehlich
Subject: Re: finish_map and layered textures
Date: 29 Jan 2002 16:23:31
Message: <3c5712d3@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <slr### [at] fwicom> , Ron Parker
<ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
> I wonder why you wonder. Perhaps it's because the people who want it and
> the people who would implement it aren't the same people. The patches that
> are in MegaPOV, and to some extent the features that are in POV itself, are
> not there because some user or group of users wanted them. They're there
> because some programmer thought they'd be useful, or fun to implement, or
> interesting to play with.
There are also history reasons. It didn't make sense until 3.1 in the first
place, as <http://www.povray.org/working-docs/id000174.html#6_6_1> explains
finish originally contained things that didn't exactly were finishes and that
could not be applied in any useful way. Of course, as this problem has been
fixed in 3.1 there is no reason not to have a finish map, except that it is
rarely needed and can be created (as pointed out here already) with texture
maps.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> You would need a map for every property of the finish-block ...
No. You could nest finish_maps without making a texture_map, so you still can use it
with
layered textures.
cu!
--
camera{location-z*3}#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*(C/50)#end#macro L(b,e,k,l)#local C=0
;#while(C<50)sphere{G(b,e),.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1
;#end#end L(y-x,y,x,x+y)L(y,-x-y,x+y,y)L(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)L(-y,y,y+z,x+y)L(0,x+y,
<.5,1,.5>,x)L(0,x-y,<.5,1,.5>,x) // ZK http://www.povplace.be.tf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
