Chris Huff wrote:
> 
> But your syntax would allow something like:
> red SPLINE hue SPLINE
> which doesn't make sense.
> 
> (interesting stuff about color syntax)
> 
> I have been thinking about new ways of specifying colors(which I still
> think is a separate issue from the curves filter), but I would use a
> slightly different syntax:
> color           (tells POV a color is coming)
> rgb|hsl|cmy|    (color space name)
> < c1, c2, c3>   (A 3 component vector specifying the color values)
> 
> Keywords red, green, and blue wouldn't be used any more, at least not
> for specifying colors. You wouldn't need hue, saturation, magenta,
> yellow, etc. either.
	Why not? Actually, red SOMETHING hue SOMETHING does make sense: first
work in rgb color-space and change red without touching green and blue,
then work in hsl and change hue without touching saturation or
brightness...

	This would make for an easy way to get the grayscale equivalent of a
color for example (color rgb <whatever> saturation 0) or other effects
of the kind...

> Filter and transmit wouldn't be specified as part of the color, they
> would be part of a separate "transparency" block in the pigment. Layered
> textures would also have a way to specify different transparency effects
> that would only affect the texture layering.
> 
	I prefer to have the color and transparency defined together (the way
they are now) since they usually follow the same pattern. Needing to
specify the pattern twice would be redundant, more difficult and
error-prone...

	Just my 2 copecks,

-- 

* Abandon the search for truth, * mailto:ber### [at] inamecom
* Settle for a good fantasy.    * http://www.enst.fr/~jberger
*********************************

Post a reply to this message