For my compile of UVPov compared against the official windows version, both
images were identical.  Removing the "#version 3.1" did change the image.
The reason is that by default UVPov treats layered textures differently.  It
treats filter like filter and transmit like transmit (the official version
treats both filter and transmit like transmit).  Adding "#version 3.1"
enables backwards compatibility.

-Nathan

<jrm### [at] videotronca> wrote...
>
> The version default to 3.1. What version should I try? Anyway, I
> guess that it is an effect on the transparent color maps.
> Here's the file (attached): it's simplified but present the same
> effect. Run it under standard pov and uvpov to see.
>
> I'm just starting to use uvpov. I guess that I'll understand later.
>
> Nathan Kopp wrote:
> >
> > Hmm... I haven't experienced this.  Watch out for differences in layered
>  textures (you may need to use #version to make UVPov look like the
> official
> > POV).
> >
> > -Nathan
> >
>

>
> > > I just installed uvpov on my linux box and I was making some new
> > > aliases in bash to use it from any working directory : needing to
> > > see how uvpov would behave when rendering a standard .pov I was
> > > quite surprised to see that the uvpov rendering is much, much more


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


> #version 3.1;
>
> #include "colors.inc"
> #include "stones.inc"
>
> #declare Bille = sphere {0,1
> texture {T_Stone6}
> }
>
> light_source { <1, 3, -5>
> color rgb<1,1,1>}
>
> camera {location <0, 0, -3>
> look_at 0}
>
> object {Bille}

Post a reply to this message