"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> > You do a lot of work.
>
> I'm sure that over the long history of POV-Ray's development, that there must be
> an astronomical amount of work that was done to bring POV-Ray to the stage where
> it is at.   I'm sure there have been many, many hours of long, hard, tedious
> hours of drudge work and thousands of largely unseen, thankless jobs.
> I'm always happy that it has continued on, and is always improving.
>
> > Your mistake - isn't present a fast render of curves.
> > Sphere_sweep - bad option.
>
> Yeah, sphere sweep kinda sucks, I'll admit.
> I presently use a sphere for the first point, and then extend a cylinder out to
> every subsequent point after that.   Seems to do the job smoothly enough and I
> don't get the holes / choppiness of too few spheres, or the very slow results
> from using 100,000 spheres to make a "line".
>
> > Povray - is very good. But, you are stubborn. :)
>
> True, but that's one of their greatest strengths!  ;)
>
> > Why you aren't interested time of a render
> >  scenes, but only quality???
>
> I'm sure speed is always a desire - but not at the expense of quality.   PLENTY
> of others produce products where speed is top priority.   Once computing power
> catches up, then there will be quality AND speed.
>

Not according to Blinn's Law: "As Technology advances, Rendering time remains
constant."

This is because, rather than using new technologies to make already good scenes
faster, we use it to make them better.  We use techniques that would have been
too expensive, time-wise, before, but are now feasible due to faster equipment.

Peddie's Axiom: "In Computer Graphics, too much is never enough."

http://electronicdesign.com/displays/11-myths-about-computer-graphics

and finally, I don't mean to sound harsh or anything, but if you can't
contribute, don't criticize.

Regards,
A.D.B.

Post a reply to this message