>I am not going to discuss the decision to integrate mechsim into POV-Ray. 
>If you don't understand the extremely obvious reasons for this you should
>probably  either use POV-Ray more intensively or have a look at the
>mechsim source.

Hmm, I have looked at the Mechsim source, but that is not where the
answer is. The answer is in the architecture of the software we use.
Look for instance at the Pixar  & ILM world where modelling &
animation is separated from the rendering. This have two advantages,
you can concentrate on the modelling using low(er) quality real-time
output i.e OpenGL and later achieve maximum quality output by batch
rendering the output of the modeller. 

With POV the solution has always been to incorporate all features into
one single appl. I am still interested to know why you decided to
incorporate simulation features into the POV code base as opposed to
writing a separate modeller. I can think of one big advantage which
pleads for incorporation; objects can interact with almost all other
obejcts within POV, whereas with an external modeller they usually
interact only with blocks, ball and planes :(

What happens if somebody invents a beter and faster
rendering/raytracer algorithm ? All our modelling and simulation
tools, hardcoded into povray become worthless ? It feels like a
marriage without the possibility if divorce.
 
>I don't want to sound selfish so again, if you prefer to use a different
>tool i am the last one preventing you from doing so but your arguments are
>rather weak.
>
>> Could we compare ? i.e. create a sample scene, a sort of a skyvase
>> for mechsim and compare on speed an accuracy ? See where the limits
>> are ?
>
>That's a great idea - just take one of the sample scenes.  'bar.pov' and
>'tshirt.pov' are good test cases for this.  The 'tutorial06.pov' scene
>from the tutorial would be worth trying too.  Good luck!

Nice examples. I rendered them already and they are indeed very
interesting. Look for instance at the "chair" example. A object falls
down, land on a "chair" bends and flexes and is later shoved off.
The object is stiff enough to holds it shape, but flexible enough to
bend, yet when pushed sideways it show no friction effects. The same
with the "snake" like behaviour  from the other object which slides
over a block. 

The objects behave like they are made from rubber, rubbed with a lot
of oil. Flexible, reacting on impact, full recovery afterwards (no
deformation) and able to slide over sharp edges without showing
friction effects or little shocks in movements. So they do not appear
"normal" to me. I like the images and animations though, and I found
the series of dominos falling like wet pieces of cake very amusing but
I am unsure whether whe are really simulating natural behaviour ..

As for the challenge of comparison, it would be very hard to model
this behaviuor in another tool, I could try maybe with a series of
boxes connected with lots of springs and dampers, to create a
harmonica effect. But somehow I've got the feeling you have tried this
already and know the answer :)

Happy coding

Post a reply to this message