I'm not prepared to release the actual scene, but I did start some work on
finding a simpler scene that would make the problem appear.  The code below so
far does NOT invoke the problem with 3.7, but contains the features I wouldda
guessed would be necessary.


// -- begin code to test missing persons

#declare clothtext=texture {pigment{rgb x} finish {ambient rgb 1}}
#declare bluetext= texture {pigment{rgb z} finish {ambient rgb 1}}
#declare sphereobj=    sphere {<0,3,10>,4}

#declare clothtext1=
        texture{
                object{sphereobj
                texture{clothtext}
                texture{bluetext}}
         }

union{
        sphere{<0,3,10>,2.1 texture{clothtext1}}
difference{
        union{
                cylinder{<-4,-4,10>,<4,4,10>,2 texture {clothtext1}}
        blob{
                threshold 0.1
                cylinder{<0,-3,10>,<0,3,10>,2,1 texture {clothtext1}}
                cylinder{<-5,-0,10>,<5,0,10>,2,1 texture {clothtext1}}
                }
        sphere {<0,0,9>,2.}
}
         }
         }

//-- end code








Le_Forgeron <lef### [at] freefr> wrote:
> Le 25/02/2014 12:59, gregjohn a écrit :
> > The attached file shows two renderings of the exact same povray SDL file, one
> > with 3.6.2, the other with 3.7.  As you can see, the figures are completely
> > missing.
> >
> > The figures are largely composed of one large, multi-component blob, with
> > different textures from face to "uniform" to "hands". There are CSG operations
> > to cut away places for eyeballs and the mouth.  Hair, earring, and eye objects
> > in the CSG are compleletly missing as well.
> >
> > FS182 makes reference to a texture & CSG problem for blobs, and the beta log
> > incorrectly lists it as "Fixed or mitigated".
> >
> > http://bugs.povray.org/task/182
> >
> > For backwards scene compatibility, I would recommend that this needs to be
> > re-opened.
> >
>
> Scene, please ?
>
> May be instead of reopening #182, creating your own bug report ?
>
> cutaway & intersection/difference is not blob specific, but look at #183.
> And #115.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Just because nobody complains does not mean all parachutes are perfect.

Post a reply to this message