 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
13 entries this round.
4 use POV-Ray.
1 uses Blender.
The other eight all use some $$$ renderer.
What gives?
Regards,
John
--
ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Roberto Ferrer de Amorim
Subject: Re: Where have all the POVers gone?
Date: 19 Jul 2001 13:05:14
Message: <3b57134a@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well, I used to be a POVer, but now I'm more into Blender, specially for
animations... scanline renderers are much faster, and thus make you much
more productive. That explains also the $$$ renderers you mentioned.
If I want (or need) raytracing, I'd still use POV for simple raytraced
images, but if things get more complicated, I'd go with BMRT. Or maybe
LightFlow (although I don't think lightflow is a true/dedicated raytracer
like POV).
I guess that with the long render times raytraced animations (with POV,
BMRT, Virtualight and others) become unfeasible for most users.
I know you asked first, but what do *you* think of it? What might be the
reason?
Best regards,
Roberto "Wolfox" Amorim
> 13 entries this round.
>
> 4 use POV-Ray.
>
> 1 uses Blender.
>
> The other eight all use some $$$ renderer.
>
> What gives?
>
> Regards,
> John
> --
> ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Roberto Ferrer de Amorim <ram### [at] comdesconto combr> wrote:
: I'd still use POV for simple raytraced
: images, but if things get more complicated, I'd go with BMRT. Or maybe
: LightFlow
Why? What's so much better in those than in POV-Ray?
I haven't have the chance to test too much, but deducing from a couple of
simple tests which I was able to perform, POV-Ray is ofter much more efficient
than LightFlow (I have no idea about BMRT).
PS: I don't know why, but it seems to be a pretty common idea that
POV-Ray is a lot slower than other raytracers. Where does this idea come
from? I have never seen any actual test showing that other raytracers were
significantly faster than POV-Ray; all the contrary: I have witnessed some
tests were POV-Ray is quite a lot faster than another raytracer (LightFlow).
Another funny phenomenon is that when a new Raytracer is made and the
author makes a couple of test images which show the very best of this new
raytracer, then the simple fact that these images look different from
typical POV-Ray images make people think that the new raytracer is a lot
better than POV-Ray. No matter how many stunning incredibly photorealistic
images people make with POV-Ray, this phenomenon is prevalent.
I'm not saying that there couldn't be a raytracer which has some much better
features and quality than POV-Ray; what I mean is that people are way too
eager to believe a couple of example images and circulating rumors, instead
of adopting a rational approach.
As for scanline rendering being faster than raytracing, well, this is
completely true.
However, the idea of the speed difference between scanline rendering and
raytracing is often very biased. Scanline renderers usually use just
triangles to define the whole scene, and people too often compare it to
POV-Ray rendering complicated primitives and CSG.
In fact, if we give the exact same scene made of triangle meshes to POV-Ray,
most people will probably be quite suprised how fast POV-Ray renders it.
POV-Ray can be incredibly fast when rendering triangle meshes. I have gone
up to more than 30 millions of triangles in a scene, and POV-Ray renders it
in about 1 minute (800x600, antialiasing, three light sources). A scanline
renderer couldn't do much better.
--
#macro N(D,I)#if(I<6)cylinder{M()#local D[I]=div(D[I],104);M().5,2pigment{
rgb M()}}N(D,(D[I]>99?I:I+1))#end#end#macro M()<mod(D[I],13)-6,mod(div(D[I
],13),8)-3,10>#end blob{N(array[6]{11117333955,
7382340,3358,3900569407,970,4254934330},0)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
For me it came down to what I wanted to be able to do
in an animation. Programming my own in-betweener
program and trying to link it into my work flow using
Moray and POLYRAY was fun, but I noticed my models kept
wanting to get more and more organic and I wanted to be
able to animate control points in bezier patches,
etc... I had had Hash AM before but found going from a
CSG/scripting background a spline-based modeller too
hard, but thought I'd try it again and lo and behold I
am modelling at full tilt now without problems and
LOVING all the additional power I have to animate.
For mathematical animation I still use POLYRAY and my
Tweener program and hand coding, but for character
animation, AM is pretty sweet. I wouldn't want to be
in the middle of my current project using POV or
POLYRAY- I would not anywhere near as far into it as I
am already.
For me it isn't the raytracer per se (thought hat is
part of it) but in getting the data to the raytracer in
such a way that I am *animating* rather than
scripting/programming all the time.
-peter
--
http://www.users.qwest.net/~dearmad
Why bother? I'm not interesting.
But... maybe "Ballet pour ma fille" will be.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in news:3b571851@news.povray.org Warp wrote:
> PS: I don't know why, but it seems to be a pretty common idea
> that POV-Ray is a lot slower than other raytracers.
> [...]
> Another funny phenomenon is that when a new Raytracer is made and
> the author makes a couple of test images which show the very best
> of this new raytracer, ....
A simple explaination?
For many people, POV-Ray is the reference.
Ingo
--
Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
Pov-Ray : http://members.home.nl/seed7/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> A simple explaination?
>
> For many people, POV-Ray is the reference.
yup - you want to write a raytracer, your first stop is the povray source
code.
--
Rick
Kitty5 WebDesign - http://Kitty5.com
Hi-Impact database driven web site design & e-commerce
TEL : +44 (01625) 266358 - FAX : +44 (01625) 611913 - ICQ : 15776037
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://Povray.co.uk
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thats simple..
Helper applications. Automated plugins, etc..
And most of all..
'Learning curve'
"John VanSickle" <van### [at] erolscom> wrote in message
news:3B57098D.E37B9BD6@erols.com...
> 13 entries this round.
> 4 use POV-Ray.
> 1 uses Blender.
> The other eight all use some $$$ renderer.
> What gives?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Povray wrote:
>
> Thats simple..
>
> Helper applications. Automated plugins, etc..
>
> And most of all..
>
> 'Learning curve'
Yes, but once upon a time the IRTC was mostly POV-Ray.
--
ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was wondering when someone would start posting Maya stuff, but I guess people
that work with Maya are to busy making movies, etc.
- Nekar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Somone did post using Maya- it wasn't in the top
animations for me, though.
--
http://www.users.qwest.net/~dearmad
Why bother? I'm not interesting.
But... maybe "Ballet pour ma fille" will be.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
