On 9/18/20 10:47 AM, Kenneth wrote:
> "Ton" <ton### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> 
>> My version of uberpov is from https://github.com/UberPOV/UberPOV, the last
>> version, dated 10 February 2015.
> 
> OK. I downloaded the Windows 64-bit version of this-- I *think* it's the correct
> 'stand-alone' version-- dated one day earlier on the Github page: UberPOV
> v1.37.1.0.beta10
> 
>> Povray 3.7 doesn't have the stochastic rendering mode am3, that's probably why
>> your plugin on version 3.7.0 doesn't work...
> 
> Apparently you're correct; this earlier(!) version of UberPOV DOES recognize the
> "+ac0.9" command. That seems strange to me; I would have thought that the
> (later) piggyback version for 3.7.0 would also have that ability already
> built-in to its binary, thus 'overriding' 3.7.0's limitation. Anyway, it does
> work. Thanks.
> 
> [William wrote...}
>> Hmm, wonder if I can trigger it with your simpler test cast Ton.
>>
>> We can indeed! All one needs do is change:
>> background { color srgb <0, 0, 0> }
>> to:
>> #declare Acajou = srgb <0.29804,0.18431,0.15294>;
>> background { color Acajou }
>> and the cpu time jumps...
> [snip]
> 
> In the Windows version of UberPOV beta 10 (the version I downloaded, as above),
> the render times for Ton's scene are identical, with or without this
> background/color change-- a quick 4 seconds at 800X600. But the visual results
> indicate that AA is not working at all, or very minimally. And, as you mentioned
> earlier, the render statistics say:
> 
> Antialiasing...on (Method 3, Threshold 0.100, Depth 6, Jitter 1.00, Gamma 2.50)
> 
> samples: 0   Smpls/Pxl: 0.00
> 
> -----------
> [off-topic]
> This UberPOV beta 10 'stand-alone'(?) installation was an interesting
> experience. Unpacking it in 7-zip, it unzips as a 'application'. I thought this
> would be an 'installer'-- but no, clicking on it launches UberPOV itself...with
> scenes present that I had already opened in some other version of POV-ray. It
> makes me wonder what assets this version is automatically using; maybe from
> within my 3.7.0 folder(s)?
> 
> Another odd thing:
> Running Ton's test scene the first time in this version, there was a fatal
> error... in his camera declaration, of all places!
> 
> camera
> {
>     location <25, 8, 0>
>     right <image_width / image_height, 0, 0>
>     look_at <12, 0, 0>
> }
> 
> The fatal error was at the 2nd line-- ""Expected numneric expression,  /  found
> instead". Huh?!
> 
> So I changed that line to the more standard syntax,
>       right x*image_width/image_height
> 
> ..... but that triggered a *different* fatal error...
> "No matching } in 'camera', * found instead". Huh?!
> 
> I finally got it to work by using
>       right <1.3333,0,0>
> 
> Very strange...especially since my own more complex scenes run perfectly OK with
> the 'problem' syntax. (Although, in my scenes, I never put the camera
> declaration as the last item. Maybe that's the culprit?)
> 
> It's a good thing that I have a sense of humor; otherwise, these crazy errors
> would drive me insane ;-)

i've not followed uber for a bit now ... but in version povray 
3.8.0-alpha.10064268 you don't even have to set the right vector 
anymore: http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Camera#Aspect_Ratio 
... so i'm not sure where the uber you're using is at ... just a thought.

Post a reply to this message