18.5... maybe.... And I could add a point by opening the documentation up.
Okay, so I'm no where near a "hardcore" POVer.  I think my score could even
be subtracted by 4 points considering I'd have to double-check everything to
know it for certain.

bob h

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 1 Feb 2002 10:16:42 -0600, bob h wrote:
> Okay, so I'm no where near a "hardcore" POVer.  I think my score could even

That's "harcore", Bob.

-- 
#local R=rgb 99;#local P=R-R;#local F=pigment{gradient x}box{0,1pigment{gradient
y pigment_map{[.5F pigment_map{[.3R][.3F color_map{[.15red 99][.15P]}rotate z*45
translate x]}]#local H=pigment{gradient y color_map{[.5P][.5R]}scale 1/3}[.5F
pigment_map{[.3R][.3H][.7H][.7R]}]}}}camera{location.5-3*z}//only my opinions

Post a reply to this message

"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote in message
news:slr### [at] fwicom...
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2002 10:16:42 -0600, bob h wrote:
> > Okay, so I'm no where near a "hardcore" POVer.  I think my score could
even
>
> That's "harcore", Bob.

Oh, as in Harcore Composites http://hardcorecomposites.com/highlights.html

bob h

Post a reply to this message

Xns### [at] povrayorg...
> in news:slr### [at] fwicom Ron Parker wrote:
>
> > you ....
>
> After all this harcore stuff,
> you actually renderd a complete scene, posted it, somebody even liked it
> and publicly said he uses it as his desktop image.
>
> Ingo

And...
- you get paid to create povray scripts or images
- software vendors send you copies of their graphic software just for you to
tell them how well it compares to povray
- webmasters ask for your permission to use your povray images in
their pages
- webmasters don't ask, but use your povray work in their pages anyway
- your images appear in magazines (interior pages)
- your images appear on magazine or book covers
- you are interviewed about your povray work
- you give public conferences about your povray work
- your images/animations are shown/featured in public during art-related
shows
- your images/animations are shown/featured in public during non-art-related
shows

G.

--

**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

> POV-SDL:

y-y-n-n-n-y?-y-y, but not for the popularity part.
5

> POV features:
y-n-y-y-y-n-n-n, but I could figure it out-y-y-y-n-y-y-y, but just a very bad
copy-y-y-y-y
14

> Math:

n-n-n-y-y-y-n-n-y-y-y?-n, but give me a piece of paper...
6

> Raytracing algorithms:

-y? I've been reading Foley-Van Dam for a while now-y-n, but I guess it-n-didn't
know, but now I do-y-n, only the obvious one-y-n, but I guess it-y, thanks to
Nathan's paper-n
5

> Formats:

n-y-y-n
2

>
> The IRTC:

no, definitely I don't.-y-y
2.
>
> POV-Ray programming:

n-n-n-n-n-n-n, but I can read...-n-n.
0


So Total: 34.

Post a reply to this message

In article <slr### [at] fwicom>,
 Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:

> you've used nested pigment_maps; 

Yep.


> you understand why, given that A is #declared as a number, (A) and A aren't 
> always the same thing; 
> you know all of the options to the repeat warp;
> you've used one or more repeat warps to create your own infinitely-tileable 
> patterns;

Yes.


> you know how to force the media code to take more samples in an interesting
> area of the scene; 

This sounds interesting...the only method I know of is to use completely 
transparent hollow shapes to force new intervals, is this what you are 
talking about or are you thinking of a better method?


> you understand why a plane makes a bad media container;
> you know how to use type 5 scattering media; 

Yes.


> you know how to simulate distance-dependent reflection; 

It isn't physically correct, but I still know how to do it.


> you know how to use .df3 files to create arbitrary full-color solid pigments;

Yes. I'm even working on a program to create the necessary files, and 
automatically generate the POV code.


> you've used multiple text objects to achieve a desired text effect...

I think you need to define "desired text effect". I assume you are 
referring to the circle text macro, but that could also describe using 
multiple objects to get text of different sizes, or any time you use 
multiple text objects.

Hmm...
You know how to make an arbitrary warp (such as the displace warp, 
uneven scaling, or twisting) of any pattern in POV script.
You know how to directly specify the rgb color of pigment/media using 
functions.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message

In article <3C5A7CFA.69A5EBEA@namtar.qub.ac.uk>,
 Grey Knight <s16### [at] namtarqubacuk> wrote:

> Actually, I was just looking at your site and saw a picture of a DNA
> ring. If you still have the macro for generating that, I'd like it.

It isn't hard, just a bunch of spheres and cylinders in a loop and some 
transformations. Basically, rotate for the twisting, translate out by 
the diameter of the ring, and rotate to the position on the ring.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message

Only 14... :(

-peter

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.)
> 


-- 
Current obsession: "Ballet pour ma fille."
http://www.applesnake.net

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.)
> 
> * You have participated in the IRTC and got to the top 20 best images.
Or animations... Yes

> * You have won a price in the IRTC.
A prize, yes.

> * You have made bicubic patches by hand (and they worked as you
> expected).
Yes.

> * You have made a pov-script that creates a smooth surface with
> bicubic patches using some algorithm.
It's how the Greb are done.

> * You have made triangle meshes by hand.
Yes.

> * You have made a pov-script which generates triangle meshes using
> some algorithm.
Yes.

> * You have used the quadric, cubic, quartic or poly primitives.
How many for using all but the poly?

> * You have used poly objects bigger than 4th degree.
Nope.

> * You have calculated the polynomial for that poly object by yourself
> (instead of looking at the formula somwhere or just trying random
> values).
No.

> * You know the format of a PCM file.
Yes (got to, my modeler imports and exports it).

> * You have made one by hand.
No.

> * You have made a program which outputs a df3 file and used it in a
> scene.
No.

> * You know what a df3 file is and what's its format.
No.

> * You have made a patch for povray.
Wrote some code.

> * Your patch is included in MegaPov or at least it's popular.
Yes.

> * Your patch was included in POV-Ray 3.5.
Yes.

> * You have made a popular tool for povray.
Dunno if it's popular...

> * You have used every object type, every camera type, every light
> source type, every media type, etc. and know how to use them.

I haven't tried all the camera types.  Yes on the rest (for 3.1g).

> * You could write a torus-shaped isosurface by memory, without needing
> to look anywhere for the function.
No.

> * Even if you don't remember the torus function, you could deduce it
> by yourself, without looking it anywhere.
Yes.

> * You know what is the "sturmian root solver" thing which is used with
> the 'sturm' keyword in some objects (ie. you know the algorithm it
> uses).
No.

> * The intensity multiplier curves and light fading functions in the
> light source section of the povray manual are very clear and you
> understand them perfectly (and you might use them to choose your light
> source types).
Yes.

> * You understand how photon mapping works (at algorithm level).
No.

> * You have found the 'average normal bug' by yourself in a povray
> version previous than 3.1e.
No.

> * You know exactly what was causing it.
No.

> * You never include the povray include libraries (like colors.inc)
> because they slow parsing, but always define your colors, textures,
> etc by yourself.
Yes.

> * You only use the png format when working with povray.
Yes.

> * You always use it with alpha channel.
No.

> * It's very easy to you to make slope maps and actually you often use
>   them to make your textures.
Easy, but I rarely use them.

> * You know what the 'use_index' keyword is used for without looking at
> the manual.
Yes.

> * You understand the matrix transformation and you can write them by
> hand.
Yes.

> * You know how to calculate the matrix from any number of consecutive
> transformations (translate, scale, rotate).
Yes.

> * For any given identifier name you can tell by heart if it's a
> reserved keyword (ie. an illegal identifier name) or not (of course
> without having syntax highlighting to help you).
Probably.

> * You could make any of the Chris Colefax's includes or macros by
> yourself if you wanted.
Likely.

> * You use frequency, phase, octaves, omega and lambda without problems
> when creating your own textures.
Yes.

> * You can tell what does each one of them do (without looking at the
> documentation).
Yes.

> * You understand the scattering function pictures in the media section
> of the documentation.
Yes.

> * You remember all the keywords that can be put in a global_settings
> block and you know what do they mean and how to use them.
Rarely use them.

> * Making good-looking radiosity images is not a problem to you.
Never used it.

> * You remember all the built-in float and vector identifiers.
No.

> * You use all the vector and string functions without problem.
Yes.

> * You know if some special feature is already implemented in the
> POV-Ray 3.5 standard include files (and thus you know you don't have
> to implement it yourself).
Haven't tried 3.5 yet.

> * Functions, macros, arrays, loops and file-IO directives are a piece
> of cake.
Yes.

> * You never get the "camera is inside non-hollow object" warning. If
> you ever get it, it's absolutely intentional.
Only through typos...

> * You have made a modeller for povray.
Yes.

> * You often debug your povray code using the text message streams.
Yes.

> * You can easily calculate the camera parameters when you want to put
> a box right in front of the camera so that it completely and exactly
> fills the viewing area.
I have a script to do that.

> * You know which .c and .h files you must change to add a keyword to
> the parser.
No.

> * You can add a keyword and get it right the first time.
No.

> * You know which .c file contains the functionality for each aspect of
> the renderer.
No.

> * You can find a bug in the renderer source code given just a
> description of the symptoms and without using a debugger.
No.

> * You know BOTH reasons why a mesh can't be used in CSG.
No.

> * You know why refraction and media do work with meshes, even though
> CSG doesn't.
No.

> * You know that 'merge' doesn't have to be a primitive CSG operation
> and can recite the equivalent sequence of intersections, unions, and
> inverses.
Yes.

> * You know that 'difference' isn't a primitive CSG operation and you
> know how POV represents one internally.
Yes.

> * You understand how 'bounded_by' _really_ works.
No.

> * You know that a height_field has an inside and how it is defined.
Yes.

> * You've written your own include file and distributed it on the net.
> It has got some popularity.
I dare say.

> * You understand all the options to 'media' without having to look in
> the manual.
Pretty much.

> * You know, without looking at the docs, how antialiasing methods 1
> and 2 work and what's their difference.
Yes.

> * You have made yourself an obfuscated signature in POV-Ray SDL in 4
> lines or less, and you use it by default when posting to the POV-Ray
> news server.
Too busy working on Rusty...

> * You didn't know the answer to one of the above questions so you
> tried to find it in the manual.
Didn't go looking, no.

> * You didn't know the answer to one of the above questions so you
> tried to find it in the source code.
Didn't go looking.

> * You didn't know that 'merge' wasn't a primitive but now that you do
>   you have worked it out for yourself.
Not applicable.

> * You are a member of the POV-Team.
No.

44

Regards,
John
-- 
ICQ: 46085459

Post a reply to this message

Snap!

Mick

"Tim Nikias" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message news:3C59846D.AA650653@gmx.de...
> 14!
>
> Wow, I'm a genius!
>
> I agree with Ron Parker that many questions aren't realistic,
> those "know all about everything that is concerned with X"
> may be true in some cases, but in most, you'll have to be
> Einstein or Rain Man to do that...
>
> --
> Tim Nikias
> Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
>
>

Post a reply to this message