 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
+ It's been a while since I used POV...
I've always found it enjoyable, and worked
through any inconsistencies encountered...
but now, on starting to use it again, Im
wondering if somebody hasn't already come
up with a plugin or script to allow ALL
the coordinates to be entered in the same
basic mode ?
As it is, one system is required for
object point locations... another for moving
objects... another for camera or lights...
as I say, all this becomes obvious after a
test render - but wouldn't it simplify matters
to use ONE coordinate system ? Maybe not...
I could see putting the CAMERA in another
quadrant, for example... comments... suggestions ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stu wrote:
> + It's been a while since I used POV...
> I've always found it enjoyable, and worked
> through any inconsistencies encountered...
> but now, on starting to use it again, Im
> wondering if somebody hasn't already come
> up with a plugin or script to allow ALL
> the coordinates to be entered in the same
> basic mode ?
>
> As it is, one system is required for
> object point locations... another for moving
> objects... another for camera or lights...
> as I say, all this becomes obvious after a
> test render - but wouldn't it simplify matters
> to use ONE coordinate system ? Maybe not...
> I could see putting the CAMERA in another
> quadrant, for example... comments... suggestions ?
Sorry, I'm not able to make much sense of what you are saying here.
As far as I know POV-Ray has only one 3 dimensional coordinate system.
This system is global. It is used for objects, cameras, light sources
and most other places IIRC.
(One could argue that another 3 dimenensional coordinate system is used
for specifying colors, but I don't think that this makes the other
system inconsistent.)
If you are sure that you have not misunderstood the POV-Ray manual
(and/or the difference between point- and vector-coordinates), could you
then show an example of what you find inconsistent ?
Btw.: I hope that you are aware that most places (except inside
functions) you are free to choose if you want to write 3D-coordinates
like this: <10, -3, 0> or like this: (10*x-3*y).
--
Tor Olav
http://subcube.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stu nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 20/01/2006 16:22:
> + It's been a while since I used POV...
> I've always found it enjoyable, and worked
> through any inconsistencies encountered...
> but now, on starting to use it again, Im
> wondering if somebody hasn't already come
> up with a plugin or script to allow ALL
> the coordinates to be entered in the same
> basic mode ?
>
> As it is, one system is required for
> object point locations... another for moving
> objects... another for camera or lights...
> as I say, all this becomes obvious after a
> test render - but wouldn't it simplify matters
> to use ONE coordinate system ? Maybe not...
> I could see putting the CAMERA in another
> quadrant, for example... comments... suggestions ?
>
>
Camera, light(s) and objects all use the same coordinates.
Translations are deltas between the original location and the desired location.
Rotations are around the origin <0,0,0> and expressed in degrees around the 3 axis.
Positive been
anti-clockwise when looking toward the positive direction of the corresponding axis
(lefthanded
system, just like my maths profs taught me)
+X = right
+Y = UP
+Z = AWAY
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tor Olav Kristensen <tor### [at] TOBEREMOVEDgmail com> wrote:
> stu wrote:
> > + It's been a while since I used POV...
> > I've always found it enjoyable, and worked
> > through any inconsistencies encountered...
> > but now, on starting to use it again, Im
> > wondering if somebody hasn't already come
> > up with a plugin or script to allow ALL
> > the coordinates to be entered in the same
> > basic mode ?
> >
> > As it is, one system is required for
> > object point locations... another for moving
> > objects... another for camera or lights...
> > as I say, all this becomes obvious after a
> > test render - but wouldn't it simplify matters
> > to use ONE coordinate system ? Maybe not...
> > I could see putting the CAMERA in another
> > quadrant, for example... comments... suggestions ?
>
> Sorry, I'm not able to make much sense of what you are saying here.
>
> As far as I know POV-Ray has only one 3 dimensional coordinate system.
> This system is global. It is used for objects, cameras, light sources
> and most other places IIRC.
>
> (One could argue that another 3 dimenensional coordinate system is used
> for specifying colors, but I don't think that this makes the other
> system inconsistent.)
>
> If you are sure that you have not misunderstood the POV-Ray manual
> (and/or the difference between point- and vector-coordinates), could you
> then show an example of what you find inconsistent ?
>
> Btw.: I hope that you are aware that most places (except inside
> functions) you are free to choose if you want to write 3D-coordinates
> like this: <10, -3, 0> or like this: (10*x-3*y).
>
> --
> Tor Olav
> http://subcube.com
++ Thanks Tor, for your reply. It seems we are discussing
the same issue, so Im sorry to have confused you. Yes -
that would be what I wanted - all according to the same
system - but it simply isn't so with my present installed
version of povray... it is possible I have gotten a broken
code, or otherwise messed with things by mistake.
I will try to put together a small example later...
your answer is suprising to me though... maybe I should just
start using whatever version you do :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alain <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> stu nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 20/01/2006 16:22:
> > + It's been a while since I used POV...
> > I've always found it enjoyable, and worked
> > through any inconsistencies encountered...
> > but now, on starting to use it again, Im
> > wondering if somebody hasn't already come
> > up with a plugin or script to allow ALL
> > the coordinates to be entered in the same
> > basic mode ?
> >
> > As it is, one system is required for
> > object point locations... another for moving
> > objects... another for camera or lights...
> > as I say, all this becomes obvious after a
> > test render - but wouldn't it simplify matters
> > to use ONE coordinate system ? Maybe not...
> > I could see putting the CAMERA in another
> > quadrant, for example... comments... suggestions ?
> >
> >
> Camera, light(s) and objects all use the same coordinates.
> Translations are deltas between the original location and the desired location.
> Rotations are around the origin <0,0,0> and expressed in degrees around the 3 axis.
Positive been
> anti-clockwise when looking toward the positive direction of the corresponding axis
(lefthanded
> system, just like my maths profs taught me)
> +X = right
> +Y = UP
> +Z = AWAY
>
> --
> Alain
> -------------------------------------------------
> Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.
+++ Another replier agreeing with what I'd like to have, but dont :)
Yes... x/right y/up z/deep is how I learned it also... going by
this produces very unpredicatable results with my currently installed
POV however. Thanks for your reply. I'd say I'll look carefully
at this, but after a dozen or more scripts, all with this same,
I'd long accepted it was how the POV worked... maybe I've got a
rare buggy version ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stu nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 21/01/2006 16:52:
> Alain <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>
>>stu nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 20/01/2006 16:22:
>>
>>
>>Camera, light(s) and objects all use the same coordinates.
>>Translations are deltas between the original location and the desired location.
>>Rotations are around the origin <0,0,0> and expressed in degrees around the 3 axis.
Positive been
>>anti-clockwise when looking toward the positive direction of the corresponding axis
(lefthanded
>>system, just like my maths profs taught me)
>>+X = right
>>+Y = UP
>>+Z = AWAY
>>
>>--
>>Alain
>>-------------------------------------------------
>>Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.
>
>
>
> +++ Another replier agreeing with what I'd like to have, but dont :)
> Yes... x/right y/up z/deep is how I learned it also... going by
> this produces very unpredicatable results with my currently installed
> POV however. Thanks for your reply. I'd say I'll look carefully
> at this, but after a dozen or more scripts, all with this same,
> I'd long accepted it was how the POV worked... maybe I've got a
> rare buggy version ?
>
>
>
Please, post a sample scene showing your problem.
Post in povray.binaries.scene-files
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Calvinism: Shit happens because you don't work.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"stu" <stu### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> +++ Another replier agreeing with what I'd like to have, but dont :)
> Yes... x/right y/up z/deep is how I learned it also... going by
> this produces very unpredicatable results with my currently installed
> POV however. Thanks for your reply. I'd say I'll look carefully
> at this, but after a dozen or more scripts, all with this same,
> I'd long accepted it was how the POV worked... maybe I've got a
> rare buggy version ?
x/right y/up z/deep is povraydefault but you can have your coordinatesystem
just as you prefer it by simply defining the up and right vector in the
camera statement appropriate (as long as they are perpendicular). that way
you can also switch righthanded/lefthanded coordinatesystem.
maybe it's really a buggy version. some code would help much to solve that
Regards Roman
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
*** Well, firstly, I'd like to thank all those
who took time to reply to my question... I was
learning to work around it, but gratified to see
everyone agreeing it shouldn't be this way...
...and, indeed, I have discovered the real
problem ! :)
I had borrowed an *.inc file from one of the
examples, and was using this for all my new
renders... after looking more carefully at this
I discovered it had several keyword specifiers in
it which were, for each scene, adding a rotation
and a changed view... hahaha... it's a little funny
actually, but I'm glad to have "fixed" my broken
POV, and thanks again to all who offered help.
"stu" <stu### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> + It's been a while since I used POV...
> I've always found it enjoyable, and worked
> through any inconsistencies encountered...
> but now, on starting to use it again, Im
> wondering if somebody hasn't already come
> up with a plugin or script to allow ALL
> the coordinates to be entered in the same
> basic mode ?
>
> As it is, one system is required for
> object point locations... another for moving
> objects... another for camera or lights...
> as I say, all this becomes obvious after a
> test render - but wouldn't it simplify matters
> to use ONE coordinate system ? Maybe not...
> I could see putting the CAMERA in another
> quadrant, for example... comments... suggestions ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> ...and, indeed, I have discovered the real
> problem ! :)
Hehe, cool! Those problems can drive you crazy. I once had a dying CPU,
it kept giving me memory faults, only they didn't crash POV, they just
messed up my SDL sources when rendering! I kept getting weird syntax
errors in perfectly valid code. Boy, that was scary :)
Florian
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
