Thanks Bob. Unfortunately, the final tree is the result of several compound
translations of individual pieces. It's impossible to know where the final
position of the lights will be in the scene when the glows are defined. It
seems that my kludge is indeed the only way for now, until glows behave as
attributes attached to light_sources.

"Bob H."
<per### [at] aolcom?subject=PoV-News:%20&body=Relating%20to%20POV-Ray:>
wrote in message news:3a23d326$1@news.povray.org...
> "Dave Cook" <nospam.davepc2@netdave.,com> wrote in message
news:3a23019d@news.povray.org...
> > But you can't do:
> >
> > light_source{<0, 0, 0> color rgb 0.045
> >  glow {size 0.4 type 0}
> >  fade_distance 4 fade_power 2 translate 10*y}
> >
> > Is this correct? If so, that's going to be the problem with this scene.
> > Remco created the tree by creating the branches and ornaments one at a
time,
> > then translating them into the proper position. The original idea, of
> > course, was to add the lights to the branches along with the ornaments,
but
> > this won't work given the way that the things are.
>
> Yep, same situation I encountered, almost.  I had simply replaced the
lights with glows in order to speed up
> rendering.  I had to put the transformation into each glow statement (not
all that many anyhow) instead of the
> union of each while loop segment.
>
> > Is anyone else as confused as I am? Is the glow is an attribute of the
light
> > source object, not an object itself? How can you specify the location of
the
> > light source and not be able to translate it? And why can you translate
the
> > glow if it's an attribute? Ouch, my brain just siezed up!
>
> I understand there's some stumbling block as of yet.  What I didn't
understand is what you just said.  j/k
> glows are independent creatures far as I know.  Double up on those
transformations for now.
>
> Bob
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message