 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Personally I use one unit = one centimeter, because the things I model are
easier to code with numbers of that scale. But whatever is best for you, the
important thing is to adjust the camera angle, so the result doesn't look
like a fish-eye (unless this is desired). My own trial-and-error made me
decide always to use "angle 48" in ordinary camera statements, as this seems
to fit my unit scale.
I also would advide you to write in all your scenes, that you want to share
with people, what scale you use, so we can adjust it to ours if necessary.
:o)
Regards,
Hugo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kari Kivisalo <pro### [at] luxlab com> wrote:
>> What is a pov-ray unit ?
> It is whatever you want it to be.
Not really. Even if I want one pov-unit to be one kilogram, that doesn't
make much sense, does it? ;)
--
#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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3c97db00@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>
wrote:
> Not really. Even if I want one pov-unit to be one kilogram, that doesn't
> make much sense, does it? ;)
It does on a graph. ;-)
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> But whatever is best for you, the
> important thing is to adjust the camera angle, so the result doesn't look
> like a fish-eye (unless this is desired). My own trial-and-error made me
> decide always to use "angle 48" in ordinary camera statements, as this
seems
> to fit my unit scale.
You know, the scale of your scene should affect the camera angle necessary.
If you change the scale of your scene (including the camera position and
look_at point) uniformly, the scene should look *exactly* the same. (unless
there's media, in which case you have to multiply the density of all your
media by one over whatever factor you changed the scale by.) It's likely
that your angle change would be necessary no matter what scale you use; it's
probably just your preference for the appearance of your scene.
To answer the original question, as people have said, the scale is
arbitrary... when you have empty, undefined space, who cares if the distance
from point A to B is a mile or a millimeter? If you have complete control
over the appearance and size of objects (as you do in POV-Ray), the distance
from A to B is whatever you want it to be. So, choose a scale that will be
most convenient to you.
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
[ http://www.slimeland.com/images/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> If you change the scale of your scene (including the camera position
> and look_at point) uniformly, the scene should look *exactly*
> the same.
Oh really.. Thanks for telling! :o) I fooled around with this years ago,
and left the subject as I found a way to make it look good..
> it's probably just your preference for the
> appearance of your scene.
Yes.. I thought angle was linked to scale factor but okay.. :o)
Regards,
Hugo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 19 Mar 2002 19:42:41 -0500, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Not really. Even if I want one pov-unit to be one kilogram, that doesn't
>make much sense, does it? ;)
Try to tell this to the particle system nuts around here. :)
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hm. I don't get it.
Try to tell me, seriously. POV-Units and
kilogramms? Where is the connection to a
particle system?
Peter Popov said something like:
>
> > Not really. Even if I want one pov-unit to be one kilogram, that doesn't
> >make much sense, does it? ;)
>
> Try to tell this to the particle system nuts around here. :)
>
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 20:19:51 +0100, Tim Nikias <tim### [at] gmxde>
wrote:
>Try to tell me, seriously. POV-Units and
>kilogramms? Where is the connection to a
>particle system?
In what other way would you calculate gravity?
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Peter Popov" wrote:
> In what other way would you calculate gravity?
By not dealing with the weight? For example the user could instead specify
how many units a particle should fall down in one clock unit.
However, I do see the connection between kilograms and particle systems, I'm
just pointing out that it's not a requirement.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated Feb 16)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 23:32:56 +0100, "Rune"
<run### [at] mobilixnetdk> wrote:
>By not dealing with the weight? For example the user could instead specify
>how many units a particle should fall down in one clock unit.
If you want to do it this way, you have to assign a POV unit to
acceleration (which has a known direction and so only its magnitude
matters) <g>
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
