On Fri, 18 Jun 1999 09:54:24 +0200, Marc Schimmler wrote:
>Maybe you could add a small section that
>explains how to understand them (or have I overseen such a part ... ?).

You overlooked such a part.  See "Notation and Basic Assumptions",
toward the top of the document.

Post a reply to this message

ako### [at] pacbellnet (Alan Kong) wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jun 1999 04:22:08 -0700, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
>
> > The content appears to be the same only the format has changed. I believe
> >we discussed this in .general a while back didn't we ?
>
>   We discussed the way we could no longer traverse the entire docs by paging
> down continuously. Just wanted to hear if there was something else that was
> lacking...

If we're speaking of the PDF version, the fact that the index doesn't
have hot links to the content is a minor annoyance for me.

(I don't know about the Windows version of the Acrobat Reader, but under
OS/2, it can be set to default to continuous rather than single pages,
so it *is* possible to page down continuously through the docs.)


-- 
Jeff Lee         shi### [at] gatenet         http://www.gate.net/~shipbrk/

Post a reply to this message

I got 24, but have some questions:


#12-Not really, but I have ported the Photon Mapping patch to the
Mac(and found one very tiny bug in the code). I suppose that doesn't
count.

#19-I understand what it means, I don't know how it is calculated. One
point?

#25-does this mean "the only time you use PNG is with POV-Ray" or "the
only format you use with POV-Ray is PNG"? In any case, I use PNG and
TGA.

#31-Should this be here? I have heard of emacs, but I don't know what it
is, and I don't think there is a Mac version.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 18 Jun 1999 16:58:37 GMT, shi### [at] gatenet (Jeff Lee) wrote:

>If we're speaking of the PDF version, the fact that the index doesn't
>have hot links to the content is a minor annoyance for me.

  Hi, Jeff. I'm using Acrobat Reader v4.0 for the Windows platform and I'm
able to click on a topic in the index to go to that particular section or
sub-section of the docs.

>(I don't know about the Windows version of the Acrobat Reader, but under
>OS/2, it can be set to default to continuous rather than single pages,
>so it *is* possible to page down continuously through the docs.)

  My version of Acrobat Reader is set up this way although I don't recall if
this is the default or I changed something.

-- 
Alan
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
news.povray.org - where POV-Ray enthusiasts around the world can get
together to exchange ideas, information, and experiences with others
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 18 Jun 1999 09:54:24 +0200, Marc Schimmler
<sch### [at] icauni-stuttgartde> wrote:

>For that I have to be at home where I can give you the sections.

  Okay.

>Not the file format but the style actually. I know that it is typical
>for programming language descriptions to describe the syntax in the way
>it is done in the 3.1 docs.

  I'll have to take a look at the particular sections...

-- 
Alan
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
news.povray.org - where POV-Ray enthusiasts around the world can get
together to exchange ideas, information, and experiences with others
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Post a reply to this message

Glen Berry wrote:

> Does the "hardcore povrayer test" count for much? Should we care?
>
> I think it makes for some interesting trivia, but shouldn't be thought
> of as some sort of important judgement on any POV-User's worth or
> merit as an artist, craftsman, or human being.
>
> Later,
> Glen Berry

I support that opinion, and not only because I don't seem to get more than 10
(of course it's hard to resist to such a test because it's fun)...
Let's try to imagine such a test in the late 1880... The hardcore oil-painter
test... with questions like :
- do you know all the chemical formulas of all the pigments you use ?
- can you build a weaving machine so that you can make your own canvas ?
- what's the ideal growing temperature for linseed, so that you can grow some in
your backyard and crush the seed to make your own oil ?
- the thermodynamics of sunsets are a piece of cake
- can you tell the names of the ten Parisian brothels where you can sit down,
drink absinth and find cheap models and inspiration ?
- what's the average WHR (waist-to-hip ratio) of the brothel employees ?
- what's the average permanency of eosine ?
- what are the scientific name of sunflowers and irises ?
- do you hunt minks and wild boars to take their hair and make your own brushes
?
- do you have your two earlobes ?
- have you ever sold any painting ?

G.

Post a reply to this message

Look at me, I got 8.

(I'll make one for 3D Studio MAX, Photoshop or Speed Razor and then test
myself ;-)


--
Lance.


---
For the latest 3D Studio MAX plug-ins, images and much more, go to:
The Zone - http://come.to/the.zone
For a totally different experience, visit my Chroma Key Website:
Colorblind - http://listen.to/colorblind

Gilles Tran wrote in message <376E51BC.C6161038@inapg.inra.fr>...
>
>Glen Berry wrote:
>
>> Does the "hardcore povrayer test" count for much? Should we care?
>>
>> I think it makes for some interesting trivia, but shouldn't be thought
>> of as some sort of important judgement on any POV-User's worth or
>> merit as an artist, craftsman, or human being.
>>
>> Later,
>> Glen Berry
>
>I support that opinion, and not only because I don't seem to get more than
10
>(of course it's hard to resist to such a test because it's fun)...

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 22 Jun 1999 01:03:47 +1000, Lance Birch wrote:
>Look at me, I got 8.
>
>(I'll make one for 3D Studio MAX, Photoshop or Speed Razor and then test
>myself ;-)

Oooh... I wanna take the photoshop one.

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:

> I support that opinion, and not only because I don't seem to get more than 10
> (of course it's hard to resist to such a test because it's fun)...
> Let's try to imagine such a test in the late 1880... The hardcore oil-painter
> test... with questions like :
> - do you know all the chemical formulas of all the pigments you use ?
> - can you build a weaving machine so that you can make your own canvas ?
<snip>

  I just looked in the documentation for my favorite Paint program and none
of these questions were answered. Go figure !

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message

Gail Shaw wrote:

> Is there anyone else who thinks the 3.0 docs were better than
> the 3.1 docs?

Yes. Software like this really needs several doc writers on each
topic. So much of the explanation is bound up in the way the
writer looks at it, their background and such. If the reader does
not have that background it does not make much sense. 

e.g. I was very familiar with the media scattering diagrams (two
points! for a total of three) before I saw them in POV but as to
the rest of the docs on media, I can't get it to work like it
"should" based upon my knowledge of scattering. 

The doc writer and I don't speak the same language. That is one
thing to get across to new-comers, don't be concerned if you
don't find the docs easily understandable, you are not alone.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)