 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24-5-2017 7:10, Mike Horvath wrote:
> On 5/23/2017 4:24 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 5/23/2017 9:00 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>> I think Christoph's point is about significant figures.
>>>
>>
>> Yes and epsilon although if you can compile your own version of PovRay
>> you can change that.
>>
>
> Hoe much of a performance hit will POV-Ray (in general) take if you do
> that?
>
Back a couple of years, when some of us were modelling the Ringworld, we
had a special POV-Ray version with adapted epsilon. I cannot remember
that there was a noticeable performance hit.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/24/2017 6:10 AM, Mike Horvath wrote:
> On 5/23/2017 4:24 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 5/23/2017 9:00 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>> I think Christoph's point is about significant figures.
>>>
>>
>> Yes and epsilon although if you can compile your own version of PovRay
>> you can change that.
>>
>
> Hoe much of a performance hit will POV-Ray (in general) take if you do
> that?
>
I never tried it Mike. So go with Thomas's answer :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/24/2017 8:07 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> And never, repeat *NEVER*, forget your dried-frog pills! ;-)
I never forget them but sometimes forget to take them.
They are getting hard to resource what with the hot weather and all. :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
> And never, repeat *NEVER*, forget your dried-frog pills! ;-)
They are loaded with bufotenine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/24/2017 12:42 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>
>> And never, repeat *NEVER*, forget your dried-frog pills! ;-)
>
> They are loaded with bufotenine.
>
>
I gave up toad licking years ago and prefer the dried variety.
They are easier to store and are quieter than the live ones.
:)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> I gave up toad licking years ago and prefer the dried variety.
> They are easier to store and are quieter than the live ones.
A commendable change in methodology.
Toad licking is unhealthy due to poisoning by bufotoxins.
The dried toads can be smoked, whereupon the cardiotoxic steroids are destroyed
by pyrolysis, wheras the bufotenine is mostly vaporized.
But of course you know that already...
;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/24/2017 3:17 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>
>> I gave up toad licking years ago and prefer the dried variety.
>> They are easier to store and are quieter than the live ones.
>
> A commendable change in methodology.
>
One must move with the times.
And they were getting expensive. :)
> Toad licking is unhealthy due to poisoning by bufotoxins.
They don't taste very good either. Whereas dried frog pill can be
flavoured with anises. (Makes the burps flavoursome.)
> The dried toads can be smoked,
Like kippers?
> whereupon the cardiotoxic steroids are destroyed
> by pyrolysis, wheras the bufotenine is mostly vaporized.
>
> But of course you know that already...
>
I didn't. I just follow the voices in my head. ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 24.05.2017 um 07:10 schrieb Mike Horvath:
> On 5/23/2017 4:24 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 5/23/2017 9:00 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>> I think Christoph's point is about significant figures.
>>>
>>
>> Yes and epsilon although if you can compile your own version of PovRay
>> you can change that.
>>
>
> Hoe much of a performance hit will POV-Ray (in general) take if you do
> that?
Virtually none; but you'll void your warranty (read: you might get
artifacts someplace else).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/24/2017 4:50 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 24.05.2017 um 07:10 schrieb Mike Horvath:
>> On 5/23/2017 4:24 PM, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 5/23/2017 9:00 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>>> I think Christoph's point is about significant figures.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes and epsilon although if you can compile your own version of PovRay
>>> you can change that.
>>>
>>
>> Hoe much of a performance hit will POV-Ray (in general) take if you do
>> that?
>
> Virtually none; but you'll void your warranty
Do you mean that we will not be able to get our money back?
> (read: you might get
> artifacts someplace else).
>
Too bad the newsgroup doesn't allow font changes for small print. :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 24.05.2017 um 18:35 schrieb Stephen:
> On 5/24/2017 4:50 PM, clipka wrote:
>> Am 24.05.2017 um 07:10 schrieb Mike Horvath:
>>> On 5/23/2017 4:24 PM, Stephen wrote:
>>>> On 5/23/2017 9:00 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>>>> I think Christoph's point is about significant figures.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes and epsilon although if you can compile your own version of PovRay
>>>> you can change that.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hoe much of a performance hit will POV-Ray (in general) take if you do
>>> that?
>>
>> Virtually none; but you'll void your warranty
>
> Do you mean that we will not be able to get our money back?
Exactly.
Not even at gunpoint.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
