I hope you will. It's not much fun to redo what others already did.

A further reference is
Dan B. Goldman: Fake Fur Rendering. Siggraph '97

> I was intending to write my patch so as to be compatible with this one
> (i.e. the same scene file can be made to use the other one just by
> changing a single parameter) but looking at the syntax this patch uses
> we seem to have completely different ideas about how it should work.

The syntax of my patch was mainly driven by the internal data structures,
which generally is a bad approach. However, be warned that the syntax is
not the main problem of adding fur to povray.

My experience while messing around was:
1. Povray is a huge program. So, it's difficult to to find the right places
to plug in your code. (The Pov-Team does not like to incorporate other
people's patches, because they usually fail to find the right places.)
2. Raytracing realistic fur is slow. This usually makes it fairly hard to
create a nice scene.

> My project will go forward as planned; I may decide to run off a few
> simple pictures using this patch for comparative purposes in the
> 'evaluation' stage, but I will not even be looking at the code.

As you base your work on the same papers, some ideas of our approaches
should be similar. It might therefore be a good idea to look at my code
to see, where you can do a better job and where you can "borrow" some
details.

Finally, I want to advise you to try to get something working as fast as
possible. Special features like curly hairs, forces, or bleeching can wait
until you have a basis for your thesis.

Personaly, I would go for Perlin's approach, because it is the most general
one, but that's up to you.

Greetings
Thomas

Post a reply to this message