I was trying to outline some shapes.  For example lets take a sphere:

sphere {<100, 120, -85>,75 texture {clear_black}}

The trick I was given was this:

sphere {<100,120,-85>,85 texture {pigment {rgbt 1}}
                         interior_texture {red_frame}}

Its what you see in the top left here:

http://www.wwwmwww.com/TRON/Outline.png

I soon learned I had to use the no_shadow flag to get what I wanted however.
And it wasn't till receintly I noticed something else was missing.  The
reflection of the grid lines are gone from the black sphere.  To get these
back I need to use the no_reflection flag as well.  However when I do that
I lose the outline of my black sphere as seen in any reflection.

Ideally what I'd like to do is to say the larger r=85 sphere doesn't cast a
shadow or is seen in any reflection inside it however it does cast a shadow
and leaves reflections outside it.

Is there any way to do that?

Thanks,
Carl

Post a reply to this message

Wasn't it Carl who wrote:
>I was trying to outline some shapes.  For example lets take a sphere:
>
>sphere {<100, 120, -85>,75 texture {clear_black}}
>
>The trick I was given was this:
>
>sphere {<100,120,-85>,85 texture {pigment {rgbt 1}}
>                         interior_texture {red_frame}}
>
>Its what you see in the top left here:
>
>http://www.wwwmwww.com/TRON/Outline.png
>
>I soon learned I had to use the no_shadow flag to get what I wanted however.
>And it wasn't till receintly I noticed something else was missing.  The
>reflection of the grid lines are gone from the black sphere.  To get these
>back I need to use the no_reflection flag as well.  However when I do that
>I lose the outline of my black sphere as seen in any reflection.
>
>Ideally what I'd like to do is to say the larger r=85 sphere doesn't cast a
>shadow or is seen in any reflection inside it however it does cast a shadow
>and leaves reflections outside it.
>
>Is there any way to do that?

I've played around with it for a while and have become convinced that
the answer is no. You either have to think of a completely new method
for outlining the shapes, live with the problems that you've got or
reduce the opacity of the outline shapes so that some of the reflections
can get through.

-- 
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure

Post a reply to this message

I can't answer your question, but that'a a nice pic on your front 
page. I'd kill the large png tho'.

Alf

Post a reply to this message

"Alf Peake" <alf### [at] peake42freeservecouk> wrote:
> I can't answer your question, but that'a a nice pic on your front
> page. I'd kill the large png tho'.
>
> Alf

This one?

http://www.wwwmwww.com/HP2.png

I could render a larger one if you like.  How big do you want?  The text I
just added after the fact.  It's not modeled.

Carl

Post a reply to this message

Mike Williams <nos### [at] econymdemoncouk> wrote:
> I've played around with it for a while and have become convinced that
> the answer is no. You either have to think of a completely new method
> for outlining the shapes, live with the problems that you've got or
> reduce the opacity of the outline shapes so that some of the reflections
> can get through.

Thanks.  I can live with the problem.  Considering it took me a while to
even notice I had a problem I'm sure most would never notice.  Is there an
official procedure to follow if I wanted to recommend this capability be
considered for inclusion in a future version of POV-Ray?  Conceptually I
think it'd be easy to add at the code level.

Thanks,
Carl

Post a reply to this message

"Carl" <car### [at] semisouthcom> wrote in message 
news:web.417558ac72aec0c7d52696ef0@news.povray.org...
> "Alf Peake" <alf### [at] peake42freeservecouk> wrote:

>> page. I'd kill the large png tho'.
>
> This one?
>
> http://www.wwwmwww.com/HP2.png

Yes, but I said "kill", not "kill for" ;)
A 350K file takes forever on my poor modem - 38 Kbps on an average day 
:c(
Hows about jpeg instead, even minimal compression would be usefull 
without giving artifacts.
Just my OT cents-worth.

Alf ( The impatient type ;)

Post a reply to this message

> Yes, but I said "kill", not "kill for" ;)

Ahhh, my misunderstanding.  I'll replace it with a jpeg soon.  It's just a
place holder till I have a chance to work on my web page some more.

Carl

Post a reply to this message