In article <MPG.16dc658922b4245d989686@news.povray.org>,
 Lars <sel### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:

> I'll look into that.  I tried a mesh earlier, using Wilbur as a TGA->
> Mesh converter, but it's normal calculations were broken, so it looked 
> quite faceted.   Even with the broken normals issue aside, I wasn't able 
> to get that many points into the surface before running out of memory / 
> hitting internal POV limits (I've got 1.5GB RAM--maxxed for this 
> machine) I think POV maxxed out parsing a 500x500 point mesh inc file.  

I don't think POV should be that limited, it might be some other 
problem...but you might get around it by using several meshes. And with 
the macros, you don't have to have the mesh resolution the same as the 
image...because it uses a function, you could just use a lower 
resolution for the macro and let the image_map interpolation take care 
of things. If you need a higher resolution for a specific area, you 
could generate a smaller, higher resolution height field for that area.


> But by using a macro, I might get farther without having to have a 
> several GB .inc file to parse.  

The macros won't help the speed, though they have the advantage I 
mentioned of allowing you to pick your mesh resolution. The macros parse 
slower than a mesh include file, which is why I added the option to 
output to a mesh file.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message