 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hmm. So much for creating an animation using MILLIONS OF TRANSPARENT MEDIA OBJECTS!
;)
Ah well, I'll find one solution or another, but thanks for giving away a dark little
secret of POV-Ray... ;)
Perhaps it could be mentioned somewhere in the docs for advanced-users or such, like
"Not-so common scene pitfalls" or such.
Tim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 02 Jan 2002 10:48:38 +0200, Peter Popov <pet### [at] vip bg> wrote:
>I know this may sound stupid but anyway... are you sure the 'union'
>statement is outside the while loop?
Scratch that, it seems like you've hit an internal limit... somewhat
like max_intersections, but not quite, it's the maximum number of
nested objects a ray can be in (99 or 127, IIRC).
A solution? Well, try to avoid that at parse time, i.e. incorporate
some collision detection algorithm so that the particles do not nest
that much. Or use a blob instead of a union.
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Nikias wrote:
>
> Hmm. So much for creating an animation using MILLIONS OF TRANSPARENT MEDIA OBJECTS!
Not really. There is nothing wrong with animating millions of objects.
Animating millions of objects nested inside of each other is, well,
just plain silly.
:^}
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3C3371BA.C7B39EAF@gmx.de>, Tim Nikias <Tim### [at] gmxde>
wrote:
> Hmm. So much for creating an animation using MILLIONS OF TRANSPARENT MEDIA
> OBJECTS!
Hmm...would it help to merge the objects? It would depend on how your
media is set up...it wouldn't work very well if you are relying on the
objects to contain the media. Another thing that may help would be to
put multiple medias inside one object.
--
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Animating millions of objects nested inside of each other is, well,
> just plain silly.
Nope. Imagine animating millions of objects, and COINCIDENTALLY, they overlap!
A particle-system is also meant to use thousands of objects for major effect, for what
else? (okay, I am being a little pushy) ;)
Also, my main problem was concerned with about 200 objects, not millions of em... ;)
Tim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I am relying on the objects as containers for the media (in most cases, they are
spherical media), but I also thought that somehow using one container with
hundreds
of media might be possible (though difficult to handle interval- and
sampling-wise).
Tim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3C348A9B.6F280CE1@gmx.de>, Tim Nikias <Tim### [at] gmxde>
wrote:
> I am relying on the objects as containers for the media (in most
> cases, they are spherical media), but I also thought that somehow
> using one container with hundreds of media might be possible (though
> difficult to handle interval- and sampling-wise).
Well, if you are using MegaPOV or the 3.5 beta, you should be able to
use the object pattern to contain the media.
--
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > Animating millions of objects nested inside of each other is, well,
> > just plain silly.
>
> Nope. Imagine animating millions of objects, and COINCIDENTALLY, they
overlap!
> A particle-system is also meant to use thousands of objects for major
effect, for what
> else? (okay, I am being a little pushy) ;)
>
> Also, my main problem was concerned with about 200 objects, not
millions of em... ;)
I don't suppose there's any clever way you could define the density map
for the media without all the overlapping spheres, is there? As in,
provide the density for a large container object that is the same as
several smaller spheres, then use considerably fewer of these specially
created container objects. Instinctively, though, this would
immediately suggest greatly increased render / parse / scene-writing
times unless it is a trivial matter...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I don't suppose there's any clever way you could define the density map
> for the media without all the overlapping spheres, is there? As in,
> provide the density for a large container object that is the same as
> several smaller spheres, then use considerably fewer of these specially
> created container objects. Instinctively, though, this would
> immediately suggest greatly increased render / parse / scene-writing
> times unless it is a trivial matter...
Well, one could perhaps put hundreds of media inside one container-object,
but I think POV doesn't want to handle that many (though I haven't tried,
but
I think it is mentioned somewhere that there is some limit).
Tim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Jan 2002 11:37:53 +0100, Tim Nikias <Tim### [at] gmxde>
wrote:
>Well, one could perhaps put hundreds of media inside one container-object,
>but I think POV doesn't want to handle that many (though I haven't tried,
>but
POV doesn't mind working with multiple media. I think I've got to
10000 when I was playing with smoke, but that was a few years ago and
I may not be remembering correctly.
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
