On 5 Dec 2001 16:15:10 -0500, Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg>
wrote:

>On Wed, 05 Dec 2001 22:10:48 +0100, Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
>> In article <3c0e86ee@news.povray.org> , Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>  wrote:
>> 
>>> : speed==quality
>>>
>>>   You still haven't explained this. What the h*** has speed to do with image
>>> quality?
>> 
>> I think his idea is that a good raytracer should be faster at a potentially
>> lower quality of the resulting image
>
>I think he's saying that the faster the raytracer, the more image quality 
>you can get in a given amount of time.  For example, if POV were twice as
>fast, you could crank down the AA threshold a bit and still keep a comparable
>render time.
>
>But then, I'm not reading his posts as Vanna has stopped selling me vowels
>to go with them.
This is actually the point. Again, I'm thinking about povray as a
renderer that professional 3d gfxers can work. Now such a gfxer, that
has to finish a project in a tight schedule, can't wait a night for
every rendering. And is this is slightly possible for still images,
for animations speed is really really equal to image quality as you
know that you'll have only a fixed amount of time per frame (for
example, 3 mins) for rendering, and then you have to adjust your scene
complexity to fit this requirement... Now, I'm not telling you, remove
quality from povray!!! This is stupid. I'm not telling you make a bad
renderer, the only thing that means to me is speed... But I'm trying
to say that if I have to spend x hours to add a new fancy quality
option (for example, a new caustic method that is hard to implement
and boosts quality in almost no image at the expense of a lot of
rendering time), mabye this time can be re-invested into optimizing
povray... It's only a matter of priority, it seems to me that povray
is focusing a lot into adding fancy rendering options (ok, but tell me
what movie you've seen with radiosity and caustics... again I have to
tell that most stuff is made with photorealistic renderman, a tool
that is not capable of doing correct reflections!!! Why??? Because
most people believe that they can live even without this stuff, if
without it I can have a blazing fast render that lets me use a 10mb
nurbs model in my scene) and not into optimizing rendering speed...

So again, quality is good, but who cares about blurred reflections and
distribuited raytracing with radiosity and photonmapping, if I can
apply it only to spheres???

Post a reply to this message