 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Seems a sily question, but while rendering a scene with radiosity the
computer decided to do a auto restart, this left the rca file available.
So it's done 500 odd lines can I get it to read in the rca and finish the
last 260ish lines if I use:
radiosity{
load_file "file-in.rca"
save_file "file-out.rca"
...settings for radiosity before things went pear-shaped...
}
will it take into account the radiosity of objects it's not rendering from
the rca file?
As I started this before XMas you can understand why I'd like to be able
to start from where it left off and know if this is going to work before I
start it up again :)
--
Phil Cook
--
All thoughts and comments are my own unless otherwise stated and I am
happy to be proven wrong.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Warp
Subject: Re: Radiosity reading in rca files what happens
Date: 20 Jan 2005 11:07:51
Message: <41efd757@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Simply continue rendering with +C (no need to modify your scene in any
way). POV-Ray will automatically continue from where it left and take
the radiosity data in the rca file into account.
That's exactly the purpose of the rca file (ie. so that +c will work
also with radiosity).
--
#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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on 20 Jan 2005 11:07:51 -0500, Warp <war### [at] tag povrayorg> did
spake, saying:
> Simply continue rendering with +C (no need to modify your scene in any
> way). POV-Ray will automatically continue from where it left and take
> the radiosity data in the rca file into account.
>
> That's exactly the purpose of the rca file (ie. so that +c will work
> also with radiosity).
Yippee so it will take into account information already processed. OOC if
I did do a load_file with a +srX and then join the two images together
would that be equivalent to +c* if I had to switch it to another computer
for some reason?
--
Phil Cook
*manually joining the images afterwards of course.
--
All thoughts and comments are my own unless otherwise stated and I am
happy to be proven wrong.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Warp
Subject: Re: Radiosity reading in rca files what happens
Date: 20 Jan 2005 16:37:43
Message: <41f024a7@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> OOC if
> I did do a load_file with a +srX and then join the two images together
> would that be equivalent to +c* if I had to switch it to another computer
> for some reason?
I have no idea. There might be something different if you do it that
way that might cause a visible line, but I have absolutely no experience
on this.
--
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > I did do a load_file with a +srX and then join the two images together
> > would that be equivalent to +c* if I had to switch it to another
computer
> > for some reason?
>
> I have no idea. There might be something different if you do it that
> way that might cause a visible line, but I have absolutely no experience
> on this.
Of course, you could just bring the partially rendered output image and the
temporary radiosity data along with the source code to the other computer,
and then you could use +C and avoid worrying about doing a partial render.
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:48:01 -0500, Slime <fak### [at] emailaddress> did
spake, saying:
>> > I did do a load_file with a +srX and then join the two images together
>> > would that be equivalent to +c* if I had to switch it to another
> computer
>> > for some reason?
>>
>> I have no idea. There might be something different if you do it that
>> way that might cause a visible line, but I have absolutely no experience
>> on this.
>
> Of course, you could just bring the partially rendered output image and
> the
> temporary radiosity data along with the source code to the other
> computer,
> and then you could use +C and avoid worrying about doing a partial
> render.
Well now I know, as I attempted to restart this without asking (that'll
teach me) +c is not an option and +srX does produce a line, shoot! Ah well
take two.
--
Phil Cook
--
All thoughts and comments are my own unless otherwise stated and I am
happy to be proven wrong.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:14:26 -0000, Phil Cook
<phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> did spake, saying:
>
> Well now I know, as I attempted to restart this without asking (that'll
> teach me) +c is not an option and +srX does produce a line, shoot! Ah
> well take two.
Just finished the final render and blow me down if there isn't a line
exactly where one showed up using +srX, so either a) reading in a
partially completed rca file will do this or b) My scene got messed up; no
bets being taken for option b :) I'll try a full (smaller) render without
any rca data being read and see what happens. I know now you're supposed
to use +c, but I'm curious as too what will happen.
--
Phil Cook
--
All thoughts and comments are my own unless otherwise stated and I am
happy to be proven wrong.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Just finished the final render and blow me down if there isn't a line
> exactly where one showed up using +srX
I noticed that the line in your image is not perfectly horizontal. Are you
sure it's not a shadow as Steve suggested, or some other coincidence?
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Wed, 2 Feb 2005 01:13:54 -0500, Slime <fak### [at] emailaddress> did
spake, saying:
>> Just finished the final render and blow me down if there isn't a line
>> exactly where one showed up using +srX
>
> I noticed that the line in your image is not perfectly horizontal. Are
> you
> sure it's not a shadow as Steve suggested, or some other coincidence?
I think the non-horizontalness is an illusion caused by the placement of
the spheres, but I've just posted to Steve and I'll start stripping it
down later. Still got 140 lines to go of my small test and either it's
still mosaicing or the focus is wrong, stopped and stripped that out I'll
see what happens. I'll post the 320x240 as a teaser when it's ready :)
--
Phil Cook
--
All thoughts and comments are my own unless otherwise stated and I am
happy to be proven wrong.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
