"Chris Cason" <del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> wrote in 
message news:488f0949@news.povray.org...
> Nice work!

Thanks .....

I've also had a poke around some of the examples and I have some questions.

It seems the biggest issue is going to be the assumed_gamma handling change 
in v3.7. If I'm understanding correctly if the parser sees the inclusion of 
that keyword it basically spits out a warning and handles gamma correction 
based on what you have in resolution.ini. Is that correct? So there's no way 
to compare a before and after image. I used isocacti as a test case and saw 
no visual difference in the image with assumed_gamma and with it commented 
out.

Another thing I looked at was some of the animation examples. Some examples 
had ini files and started clocking through and produced a series of images. 
Do we want to run through the entire animation, and produce a mov. I have QT 
pro to do that if that's the case. (I'm sure there are other apps for this) 
but QT is what I'm comfortable with.

I've reread through this thread and it still seems that there is no 
consensus on image file format and size. Whats the best approach here? 
Produce a full sized image and just scale for the thumbnails, or two 
separate runs.

What kind of timeframe are we working against here ..... by the end of the 
beta cycle and before v3.7 final release?

I'm sure there are one or two more issues that I've not hit upon. 
Stephen/Sabrina .... you guys have been mostly silent. What kind of initial 
issues have you seen? I really think it's important to get as many of the 
issues as we can out in the open before formulating a test plan. If I'm off 
base on this please speak up. I'm flexible and have no problem being pointed 
in the right direction.

Jim

Post a reply to this message