|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
I have posted two images to p.b.i showing an identical scene containing
one isosurface rendered using Megapov 0.4 One was on a RedHat 6.1 box,
the other on a Windows machine. As you can see, there is a quite marked
difference. I suspect the Windows version, the one without the white
regions, is the correct one, but am at a loss as to why. Both binaries
were pre-compiled, one by Nathan Kopp, the other by Mark Gordon. The
source to the scene is posted below. Can anyone else duplicate or
explain this?
-Alex V.
// Forgive the hideous function -- it was computer-generated (see
earlier image in p.b.i)
#version unofficial MegaPov 0.4;
isosurface{
function{((((sin(noise3d(x,x,y))/((0.0903843115083873*y)/(x+y)))*
((abs(y)+(y^0.308258313219994))+((y/z)^abs(x))))^abs((((z*0.434349831193686)
-(z+z))+(sin(z)-sin(0.309442261699587)))))^(((noise3d(sin(0.673113088589162),
noise3d(y,x,x),(x*z))/(sin(0.628716635052115)-
noise3d(0.81341931829229,x,0.655613251496106)))+(abs(abs(0.426932952366769))
+abs((z/z))))/noise3d(sin(((x+y)^(z^z))),sin(((0.947182392701507^z)*sin(z))),
sin(((z+x)^(y/z))))))}
contained_by {sphere{0,1}}
threshold .5 pigment {rgb 1} rotate <30,60,90>
}
light_source {<10, 50,15>, 1}
light_source {<10,-50,15>,.5}
camera {location <2,0,0> up y look_at <0,0,0>}
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |