 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in news:3c5977ae@news.povray.org Warp wrote:
23,
...and they let me fool around with the docs....
Ingo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Zeger Knaepen <zeg### [at] student kuleuvenacbe> wrote:
: * You didn't know the answer to one of the above questions so you tried to find
: it in the manual.
: So you get a point for cheating?
The meaning of that is that you didn't know the answer to some question
and thus you didn't take a point in that question, but it interested you
so much that you tried to find the answer.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Some years ago I made a "Hardcore Povrayer Test" just for fun.
Hmmm... only 21, and cheating a bit! Hardcore is not for me... I will
better keep listening groove.
--
Jaime Vives Piqueres
La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
>
> Some years ago I made a "Hardcore Povrayer Test" just for fun. Here it is
> again, with small updates.
>
> For each statement which you feel is true in your case (be sincere), take
> one point. The number of points you get is your score. The maximum number
> of points is 65.
> (My personal score is "only" 37, so it *is* a tough test.)
30, but with some questions i had doubts about the answer (and then
answered 'no').
A lot of questions are not very good, i picked out a few of them:
> * You never include the povray include libraries (like colors.inc) because
> they slow parsing, but always define your colors, textures, etc by
> yourself.
This is total crap of course, esp. with Povray 3.5
> * You only use the png format when working with povray.
Why does this qualify for a hardcore Pover?
> * You have made a modeller for povray.
Can you define 'modeller' please?
> * You know BOTH reasons why a mesh can't be used in CSG.
What is the second one?
I also have some suggestions:
* You have written isosurface functions by hand with more than X
characters (for 'X' use a reasonable value, for example 2000)
* You know the parameters of every internal function of Povray 3.5
(functions.inc) without looking it up. (that's a really hard one, maybe
just knowing every function is enough...)
* Your longest render was more than X days (X=5, 10, 20 or more)
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
25 ...
damn ...
maybe additional point for:
"you don't know .... but you know exactly where to find it in the docs ?"
--
#macro J(N A)#local a=mod(N 3);#local W=<int(mod(A,4)*2)int(-A/4)9>*2;#if
(!mod(a 2))sphere{W,2,2pigment{color rgb<a*5A/2W.x/A*5>}}#if(a<1)sphere{W
+<2,0>2 2pigment{color rgb<a*10A 10>}}#end#end#if(N>3)J(int(N/3)A+1)#end#
end blob{J(29229171 0)threshold 1translate<-6 3>}/******Jan Walzer******/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 21:09:41 +0100, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>> * You know BOTH reasons why a mesh can't be used in CSG.
>
> What is the second one?
Oh, sure, we tell you and then you tell someone else and pretty soon
everyone has an extra hardcore point.
It's because (at least in 3.1) All_Mesh_Intersections doesn't actually
return all of the intersections; it just returns the closest one.
> * Your longest render was more than X days (X=5, 10, 20 or more)
I rendered the sample scenes on my old Amiga when I started using POV;
some of those took days to render.
--
#local R=<7084844682857967,0787982,826975826580>;#macro L(P)concat(#while(P)chr(
mod(P,100)),#local P=P/100;#end"")#end background{rgb 1}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.y)0,0
translate<-.8,0,-1>}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.z)0,0translate<-1.6,-.75,-1>}sphere{z/9e3
4/26/2001finish{reflection 1}}//ron.parker@povray.org My opinions, nobody else's
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3C59A485.39D4EB53@gmx.de> , Christoph Hormann
<chr### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> * You have written isosurface functions by hand with more than X
> characters (for 'X' use a reasonable value, for example 2000)
Whatever size you pick up to the limit that functions allow, I have created
such a function ... not that alternating sequences of x-x+y-y+z-z or similar
combinations make a lot of sense ;-)
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ron Parker wrote:
>
> Oh, sure, we tell you and then you tell someone else and pretty soon
> everyone has an extra hardcore point.
>
> It's because (at least in 3.1) All_Mesh_Intersections doesn't actually
> return all of the intersections; it just returns the closest one.
I only know one reason: There is no 'inside' and 'outside' in a mesh.
This is perfectly sufficient. The problem with this questions is that you
can answer it on different levels, the logical and the programming level,
of course in the latter you can easily find several reasons.
>
> > * Your longest render was more than X days (X=5, 10, 20 or more)
>
> I rendered the sample scenes on my old Amiga when I started using POV;
> some of those took days to render.
>
The idea for this question is that a hardcore Pover devotes more
computational power to render jobs, whether the scene is complicated or
not is not the question IMO.
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3c5977ae@news.povray.org>, war### [at] tagpovrayorg says...
I didn't pass one single question of the test, so I guess for me it is
0.
Who did worse??
:((
--
Regards,
Sander
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 22:08:05 +0100, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
>
> Ron Parker wrote:
>>
>> Oh, sure, we tell you and then you tell someone else and pretty soon
>> everyone has an extra hardcore point.
>>
>> It's because (at least in 3.1) All_Mesh_Intersections doesn't actually
>> return all of the intersections; it just returns the closest one.
>
> I only know one reason: There is no 'inside' and 'outside' in a mesh.
> This is perfectly sufficient. The problem with this questions is that you
> can answer it on different levels, the logical and the programming level,
> of course in the latter you can easily find several reasons.
Nope, those two are the only ones I know. The 'inside' vs. 'outside' thing
is basically programming, too, in the case of meshes where such is defined,
so I don't see the same dichotomy you do here.
--
plane{-z,-3normal{crackle scale.2#local a=5;#while(a)warp{repeat x flip x}rotate
z*60#local a=a-1;#end translate-9*x}pigment{rgb 1}}light_source{-9red 1rotate 60
*z}light_source{-9rgb y rotate-z*60}light_source{9-z*18rgb z}text{ttf"arial.ttf"
"RP".01,0translate-<.6,.4,.02>pigment{bozo}}light_source{-z*3rgb-.2}//Ron Parker
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
