Remco de Korte wrote:

> I don't quite understand your question, but it brings up another
> question with me. You mention loops and the tree.inc, and, as far as I
> understand you want to extract code from these loops. What would be the
> advantage (sorry if I seem stupid - wait till you see my face 8=)
>

    Well, all's great and well, untill you want to get these objects into a
modeller.  I have yet to see a modeller that can deal with Pov Macros, so
therefore means one cannot import these objects.  Object placement by hand
is all great and good, but theres a point when it just get's two darned
complex.  In the past, I've put little cubes naming them 'Tree1', etc, doing
an extract, then going in with a text editor, but it'd be a whole lot easier
to be able to just import them into the modeller..

> The reason I ask this is that I don't understand what should be better:
> a loop or a heap of code. I tried tree.inc and was impressed, but I
> needed another kind of tree. First I fiddled around a bit with the
> declarations, but that brought me no where. Being new to POVray, but not
> very new anymore with programming I just wrote me a program that
> generated some weird looking random trees that were just what I needed.
>

    Exactly what I ended up doing, but I'd prefer not to have to rewite
every single include file to produce real objects instead of macros.. ;-P

> Only thing is that it generated plain code, so some trees could take up
> about 1Mb of code! The average tree would be 200-300Kb, but a fullgrown
> 'Giant of the Woods' needs much more. Obviously this takes much more
> time to parse. Or not?
>

    Of course, but that's why we all need bigger, moreMOREMOOORRREEE
PPPOOOWWWEEERR!!  ;-P

> If anyone here is interested in a freak-tree let me know.

    Sure, I'll trade for mine..  What did you use to do it?

        Thomas Charron

Post a reply to this message