Ben Chambers <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote:
> The problem is, you will LOSE on the quality front.
>...
>You are essentially saying "If you just ditch your quality concerns, and
>use polygonal tessellation instead, you could have much faster renders!"
Hi,
What I'm saying is that there is probaly a way to render images faster by
using an "intelligent" parser: this "intelligence" came from given it some
geometrical propertys of points to render. Also, the quality of images will
be the same.
This technic is suitable for grid of points but can be used in every case
where points have some propertys in commun. In my case , the location and
number of points are known in advance and this was used to speed up the
parser. For PoV-Ray, point's number is unkown however there locations are
in the same ray (line) and this property should be used by the parser.
I think that people get confused with what I'm saying because there is a
deep thought that it's impossible to "improve" the parser (the part of the
code that perform math functions). What I'm saying is that the actual way
of doing math calculations (and this in every field where a parser is
needed) IS OVER : People should think about using geometrical propertys
when performing math calculations...
I don't know how well this will work with PovRay but for me I'm already
doing some calculations more than 30 times faster than before! and I'm
still using it "only" for 3D objects: It's much much more powerful with
dimensions > 3.
To be honest, I start thinking that some heivy demanding math applications
should be rewritten in the perspective to take advantage of that kind of
"technologie": The parser should "impose" the way math calculations will be
done and applications should be adapted to that fact.
Taha

Post a reply to this message