|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mca### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in
news:web.4434ff738429f196c6b359800@news.povray.org:
> Jens Kleen <jkl### [at] webde> wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> I worked with Moray several years ago. I started with
>> the DOS Version than i worked with the Windows Version.
>>
>> Last time i bought a license was with 3.4 i think.
>>
>> Now it is "only" 3.5...
>>
>> And i heard there are some problems with Povray 3.6...
>>
>> Do you think there will be a update in the future?
>>
> We live in hope :-)
> The developer has retreated into RL. He was working on enhancing the
> mesh editing capacity of Moray. But I think that even that has slowed
> to a stop.
>
> properly with PovRay 3.6 is. IIRC, that starting and stopping PovRay
> Moray and PovRay 3.5) created Pov files on PovRay 3.6. So I still use
> PovRay 3.5.
>
>
>
>
Thanks for your answere. I "loved" Moray. But as far as i see, Moray
has no big future. What about making Moray Open Source? I think there
are enough developers out there that would like to work on Moray.
Just an idea.
Jens
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jens Kleen <jkl### [at] webde> wrote:
> Thanks for your answere. I "loved" Moray. But as far as i see, Moray
> has no big future. What about making Moray Open Source? I think there
> are enough developers out there that would like to work on Moray.
>
Jens,
I like the idea of open source if someone else would do the work in
developing Moray along with PovRay. But it is shareware and Lutz would have
to have a say. In ways I like it having one developer, there is little
argument over what is being done. On the other hand. There is not much
going on just now AFAICT, and the development towards more mesh editing
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Will there be a new Version of Moray?
Date: 11 Apr 2006 09:39:32
Message: <443bb194@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mca### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:web.443a70a98429f196c6b359800@news.povray.org...
> Jens,
> I like the idea of open source if someone else would do the work in
> developing Moray along with PovRay. But it is shareware and Lutz would
have
> to have a say. In ways I like it having one developer, there is little
> argument over what is being done. On the other hand. There is not much
> going on just now AFAICT, and the development towards more mesh editing
> capabilities is not the way I want it to go. But I'm not in charge so
> that's my misfortune.
>
I agree with that. I do not need sophisticated mesh editing in Moray as
there are several excellent other programs around which can do that. I only
would need good mesh conversion/export from Moray, which it does already
quite satisfactorily, imho.
> As for Moray having "no big future" I'll continue to use it as it is the
> best front end I know of, for PovRay. I don't need the newest, fastest
etc.
>
Absolutely true! I second that!
I use Moray quite often, either for building a complete scene, or for
building separate objects, depending on the way I want my scene to grow. And
it is so easy to wrap up everything together (Moray, external meshes) into a
final POV-Ray scene!
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <443bb194@news.povray.org>, t.d### [at] internlnet says...
>
> "Stephen" <mca### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht
> news:web.443a70a98429f196c6b359800@news.povray.org...
> > Jens,
> > I like the idea of open source if someone else would do the work in
> > developing Moray along with PovRay. But it is shareware and Lutz would
> have
> > to have a say. In ways I like it having one developer, there is little
> > argument over what is being done. On the other hand. There is not much
> > going on just now AFAICT, and the development towards more mesh editing
> > capabilities is not the way I want it to go. But I'm not in charge so
> > that's my misfortune.
> >
> I agree with that. I do not need sophisticated mesh editing in Moray as
> there are several excellent other programs around which can do that. I only
> would need good mesh conversion/export from Moray, which it does already
> quite satisfactorily, imho.
>
> > As for Moray having "no big future" I'll continue to use it as it is the
> > best front end I know of, for PovRay. I don't need the newest, fastest
> etc.
> >
> Absolutely true! I second that!
> I use Moray quite often, either for building a complete scene, or for
> building separate objects, depending on the way I want my scene to grow. And
> it is so easy to wrap up everything together (Moray, external meshes) into a
> final POV-Ray scene!
>
> Thomas
>
Yeah, mesh editing would be nice (especially if it included being able to
scale an image to the background as you build a custom mesh, which is a
feature missing from like 90% of them. If you are not an expert on making
something like characters in 3D and even if you are, it helps a lot. But,
its not a critical feature. The thing that caused me the most problems
with Moray where a) floating point precision problems. I.e. POV had
higher accuracy, so in some cases you have to manually "adjust" things to
be correct, b) incomplete SDL support and c) a coordinate system that is
actually the reverse of the POV-Ray default. None of these are major
issues, but in some ways it would be like if they made the Maya editor
support only 90% of the features of the Maya engine, then forced you to
tweak the rest by hand. Its annoying, especially when you can't even do
something like selecting, "Media: Muddy Water", from a list and "know"
that the result will be something reasonably expected, instead of having
to spend a lot of time fiddling with it to guess at the right settings.
In other words, templates for some known uses of some features and at
least basic support for simple objects. Heck, even if you had to build a
basic approximation algorithm for isosurfaces into it, to produce a rough
mesh that would "actually" show more or less where it was in the scene,
that would help. Instead you are lucky to get a square bounding box for
some things and some are not even available.
As good as Moray has been, its got some persistent flaws.
--
void main () {
call functional_code()
else
call crash_windows();
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Will there be a new Version of Moray?
Date: 18 Apr 2006 03:13:40
Message: <444491a4@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Patrick Elliott" <sha### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:MPG.1eadf688160dfc7a989ef9@news.povray.org...
> >
> Yeah, mesh editing would be nice (especially if it included being able to
> scale an image to the background as you build a custom mesh, which is a
> feature missing from like 90% of them. If you are not an expert on making
> something like characters in 3D and even if you are, it helps a lot. But,
> its not a critical feature.
Wings3D and Silo can do that :-)
The thing that caused me the most problems
> with Moray where a) floating point precision problems. I.e. POV had
> higher accuracy, so in some cases you have to manually "adjust" things to
> be correct, b) incomplete SDL support and c) a coordinate system that is
> actually the reverse of the POV-Ray default. None of these are major
> issues,
Yes, in particular the SDL. Different camera types for instance...
The coordinate system is not too much a problem and easily circumvented.
However, for a modeller that dedicates itself to POV-Ray, I do not really
understand. Sometimes in the prehistory, I dimly recall that Lutz explained
why, but I cannot remember...
Otherwise, I must say that I am quite happy with Moray as it enables rapid
building of awkward scenes with difficult camera positions for instance.
Much faster then, than the trial and error you have to do in POV-Ray.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote:
> Yes, in particular the SDL. Different camera types for instance...
Yes, yes.
> The coordinate system is not too much a problem and easily circumvented.
> However, for a modeller that dedicates itself to POV-Ray, I do not really
> understand. Sometimes in the prehistory, I dimly recall that Lutz explained
> why, but I cannot remember...
to his old schoolteachers rules :-)
will be done. Having said that, I like the Z is up coordinate system as
that is the way I see the world.
> Otherwise, I must say that I am quite happy with Moray as it enables rapid
> building of awkward scenes with difficult camera positions for instance.
> Much faster then, than the trial and error you have to do in POV-Ray.
more than useful to me.
Stephen.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> IIRC his reason was, that’s the way he wants to do it and that’s the way it
> will be done. Having said that, I like the Z is up coordinate system as
> that is the way I see the world.
Have a scene setting checkbox to switch between modes?
--
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <444491a4@news.povray.org>, t.d### [at] internlnet says...
>
> "Patrick Elliott" <sha### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht
> news:MPG.1eadf688160dfc7a989ef9@news.povray.org...
> > >
> > Yeah, mesh editing would be nice (especially if it included being able to
> > scale an image to the background as you build a custom mesh, which is a
> > feature missing from like 90% of them. If you are not an expert on making
> > something like characters in 3D and even if you are, it helps a lot. But,
> > its not a critical feature.
>
> Wings3D and Silo can do that :-)
>
I have seen a few that do, the problem with those was that focusing
closer on the model didn't also scale the image and the image itself
could not be scaled to a larger size. For some cases this was a bit like
trying to reconstruct the Write Flyer using nothing but a postage stamp.
:p If I ever get my system back to the point where its working right, [I
think I am now having "both" a software problem and a hardware problem :(
], I will check them out.
--
void main () {
call functional_code()
else
call crash_windows();
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Will there be a new Version of Moray?
Date: 19 Apr 2006 03:13:42
Message: <4445e326@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tim Cook" <z99### [at] bellsouthnet> schreef in bericht
news:44452155$1@news.povray.org...
> Stephen wrote:
> > IIRC his reason was, that's the way he wants to do it and that's the way
it
> > will be done. Having said that, I like the Z is up coordinate system as
> > that is the way I see the world.
>
> Have a scene setting checkbox to switch between modes?
>
Indeed! That would be an improvement.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:02:52 -0700, Patrick Elliott
<sha### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
maybe you try Rheingold3D (www.tb-software.com): it supports may of
your requests, see below:
>Yeah, mesh editing would be nice (especially if it included being able to
>scale an image to the background as you build a custom mesh, which is a
Working with backgrounds is supported or just pin an image to any
plane
>feature missing from like 90% of them. If you are not an expert on making
>something like characters in 3D and even if you are, it helps a lot. But,
>its not a critical feature. The thing that caused me the most problems
>with Moray where a) floating point precision problems. I.e. POV had
>higher accuracy, so in some cases you have to manually "adjust" things to
>be correct, b) incomplete SDL support and c) a coordinate system that is
Rheingold3D supports easy POV code "injection", so any attribute or
even "custom" materials are possible to export.
>actually the reverse of the POV-Ray default. None of these are major
>issues, but in some ways it would be like if they made the Maya editor
>support only 90% of the features of the Maya engine, then forced you to
>tweak the rest by hand. Its annoying, especially when you can't even do
>something like selecting, "Media: Muddy Water", from a list and "know"
>that the result will be something reasonably expected, instead of having
>to spend a lot of time fiddling with it to guess at the right settings.
>In other words, templates for some known uses of some features and at
>least basic support for simple objects. Heck, even if you had to build a
>basic approximation algorithm for isosurfaces into it, to produce a rough
>mesh that would "actually" show more or less where it was in the scene,
>that would help. Instead you are lucky to get a square bounding box for
>some things and some are not even available.
>
>As good as Moray has been, its got some persistent flaws.
-tb
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|