I know i'll probably get shot for this...

But is there any way of adding a crackle pattern that is resolved only on a 2D
plane rather than 3D space.  I haven't looked at the code and don't have the
means to program and compile it myself at the moment.

I know I can take a 2D slice of the 3D pattern, but that doesn't achieve what I
want, there are slight differences.  The current crackle pattern is a Voronoi
tesselation (I'm pretty certain) based on points in 3D, I wouldn't think it too
hard to adapt an additional pattern where the points are only evaluated in 2D
say on the x-y plane.

I could probably dig aroung the source code myself and figure it out, but I
don't have a compiler and am not sure how to go about it.  What freeware
compilers are available for Windows XP?

-tgq

Post a reply to this message

"Trevor G Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> I know i'll probably get shot for this...
>
> But is there any way of adding a crackle pattern that is resolved only on a 2D
> plane rather than 3D space.  I haven't looked at the code and don't have the
> means to program and compile it myself at the moment.
>
> I know I can take a 2D slice of the 3D pattern, but that doesn't achieve what I
> want, there are slight differences.  The current crackle pattern is a Voronoi
> tesselation (I'm pretty certain) based on points in 3D, I wouldn't think it too
> hard to adapt an additional pattern where the points are only evaluated in 2D
> say on the x-y plane.
>
> I could probably dig aroung the source code myself and figure it out, but I
> don't have a compiler and am not sure how to go about it.  What freeware
> compilers are available for Windows XP?
>
> -tgq

Maybe you can convert the pattern into a function and then omit the y
coordinate?

Something like:

#declare FOO = function {pigment {checker}}
pigment
{
  function
  {
    FOO(x,0,z)}
    [PIGMENT_MODIFIERS...]
  }
}

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

This might be off topic for beta-test.

Le 21.12.2008 08:48, SharkD nous fit lire :
> "Trevor G Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> I know i'll probably get shot for this...
>>
>> But is there any way of adding a crackle pattern that is resolved only on a 2D
>> plane rather than 3D space.  I haven't looked at the code and don't have the
>> means to program and compile it myself at the moment.
>>
>> I know I can take a 2D slice of the 3D pattern, but that doesn't achieve what I
>> want, there are slight differences.  The current crackle pattern is a Voronoi
>> tesselation (I'm pretty certain) based on points in 3D, I wouldn't think it too
>> hard to adapt an additional pattern where the points are only evaluated in 2D
>> say on the x-y plane.
>>
>> I could probably dig aroung the source code myself and figure it out, but I
>> don't have a compiler and am not sure how to go about it.  What freeware
>> compilers are available for Windows XP?

Assume your position & choice: you are on a pay-per-use platform.
Welcome in the IT economy.
Support your IT providers to survive the crisis...

>>
>> -tgq
> 
> Maybe you can convert the pattern into a function and then omit the y
> coordinate?


That's just taking a 2D slice of the 3D. It is not giving a valid


The OP wants to get something like Hexagon pattern, not checker.
Excepted that hexagon would be kind of 'crackle solid', not 'crackle'
alone: crackle alone would rather be like quilted, continuous variation
from center (well, according to the 'form' you use, of course; a funny
parameter of crackle to look at!).

It would probably be an easy cut-n-paste from actual 3D code to remove
the third dimension from the seed and simplify the metric computation,


Short of that, you might also try to take a slice of compressed pattern,
using a huge inversed scale factor on one axis (scale <1,1,1/9999999> ?)

Will thinks about that patch...might also be interesting to consider
variant of 'form'... or new option like solid... to get a 0-100% value
based on the actual length from center to boundary.

Post a reply to this message

"Trevor G Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> I could probably dig aroung the source code myself and figure it out, but I
> don't have a compiler and am not sure how to go about it.  What freeware
> compilers are available for Windows XP?
>
> -tgq

IIRC, there is a limited version of Visual Studio that can be used for free. I
believe it is missing some libraries that are not licensed to be used with the
free version. I was reading about it a few years ago but never got around to
installing it.

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

"SharkD" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> IIRC, there is a limited version of Visual Studio that can be used for free. I
> believe it is missing some libraries that are not licensed to be used with the
> free version. I was reading about it a few years ago but never got around to
> installing it.

That thing is called "Express Edition"; a seriously sick thing if I'm asked, but
- quote from the POV beta source code page:

"The express edition of VS2005 is reported to work, but some workarounds are
required if you wish to build the editor provided with the source. (It is not
necessary to build the editor to be able to use the EXE)."

Post a reply to this message

clipka wrote:

> That thing is called "Express Edition"; a seriously sick thing if I'm asked, but
> - quote from the POV beta source code page:
> 
> "The express edition of VS2005 is reported to work, but some workarounds are
> required if you wish to build the editor provided with the source. (It is not
> necessary to build the editor to be able to use the EXE)."

There is actually no such as thing as an express edition of VS2005,
but there are the express editions Visual C# 2005, Visual Basic 2005
and Visual C++ 2005. Obviously, the latter is required for POV-Ray.
I didn't try it with the 2008 versions, but you can still download
the 2005 versions from Microsoft.

They are not technically freeware as requested by the OP, but you
don't have to pay for them. You need to register with Microsoft
in order to use them.

The C++ version supports .NET applications and only limited native
code applications, as it does not come with the Platform SDK for Windows
system programming, which is why Win32 GUI applications will not build
out of the box. You can, however, download and install the Platform SDK
separately, its also available for free.

Been there, done that with Beta 25 (mostly out of curiosity):

http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3C480d3b6c%40news.povray.org%3E/?ttop=292406&toff=50

Post a reply to this message

Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfrde> wrote:
> clipka wrote:
>
> > That thing is called "Express Edition"; a seriously sick thing if I'm asked, but
> > - quote from the POV beta source code page:
> >
> > "The express edition of VS2005 is reported to work, but some workarounds are
> > required if you wish to build the editor provided with the source. (It is not
> > necessary to build the editor to be able to use the EXE)."
>
> There is actually no such as thing as an express edition of VS2005,
> but there are the express editions Visual C# 2005, Visual Basic 2005
> and Visual C++ 2005. Obviously, the latter is required for POV-Ray.
> I didn't try it with the 2008 versions, but you can still download
> the 2005 versions from Microsoft.
>
> They are not technically freeware as requested by the OP, but you
> don't have to pay for them. You need to register with Microsoft
> in order to use them.
>
> The C++ version supports .NET applications and only limited native
> code applications, as it does not come with the Platform SDK for Windows
> system programming, which is why Win32 GUI applications will not build
> out of the box. You can, however, download and install the Platform SDK
> separately, its also available for free.
>
> Been there, done that with Beta 25 (mostly out of curiosity):
>
>
http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3C480d3b6c%40news.povray.org%3E/?ttop=292406&toff=50

I've DLed and installed VC++ 2008 Express.  Just trying to work through some
errors to get a compile...

Post a reply to this message

"Trevor G Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> >
> >
http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3C480d3b6c%40news.povray.org%3E/?ttop=292406&toff=50
>
> I've DLed and installed VC++ 2008 Express.  Just trying to work through some
> errors to get a compile...

OK, yay I got it to compile.  I'll move any further discussion eslewhere for
now.

-tgq

Post a reply to this message

"Trevor G Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> "Trevor G Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > >
> > >
http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3C480d3b6c%40news.povray.org%3E/?ttop=292406&toff=50
> >
> > I've DLed and installed VC++ 2008 Express.  Just trying to work through some
> > errors to get a compile...
>
> OK, yay I got it to compile.  I'll move any further discussion eslewhere for
> now.
>
> -tgq


How come we're not using mingw.
I mean considering the many MS sources of trouble.

Post a reply to this message

> -----Original Message-----
> From: alphaQuad [mailto:alp### [at] earthlinknet]
> How come we're not using mingw.
> I mean considering the many MS sources of trouble.

Because of the many mingw sources of trouble?

Seriously, POV doesn't require one compiler or the other.  You can use
any C++ compiler for Windows that you want.

...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message