Great, thanks for making that clear to me.  Camera is the key I guess
a person could say.  I knew of the typical concept of rays going from
camera to scene rather than from scene to camera, just wondered of
that possible final derivitive because it sure sounded like it was a
two step process you were talking about.  I need to stay out of the
logistics of it anyway if I can't work with them  : )

Bob

Ron Parker <par### [at] fwicom> wrote in message
news:37e94fdb@news.povray.org...
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 16:37:19 -0500, Bob Hughes wrote:
> >Please forgive me if I'm being ignorant but from what Ron has said
> >about planar applied rays (sorry Ron, I'm quoting vaguely) versus
> >spherical it seems the "depth" is not a part of the original
> >calculations.  Could that be true at all? For instance, a scene
gets
> >figured orthographically first maybe and then any other camera
> >perspectives are added into that afterward, like a sort of non-ray
> >warping?
>
> Nope, not true at all.  The camera type is the only thing that
determines
> the distribution of the eye rays that are shot into the scene.
>
> My calculations were for a standard perspective camera, as that was
the
> only kind available in POV 2.2.  They'd do weird things with the
newer
> camera types.
>

Post a reply to this message