Stephen wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 09:06:07 +0200, "Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet>
> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hmm... Difficult to say... I like the concept in itself. It has a rather 
>>strong yin-yang content. What I find disturbing though, are the sharp 
>>boundaries between states (night/day; black/white). In a boudhistic sense 
>>(not that I know much about boudhism) I would expect smoother transitions 
>>and a sense of revolution (the wheel) more pronounced...
>>
> 
> 
> Thanks Thomas,
> 	I think that too, that there should be a merge between the day and night
> sky but how to reflect that in the ground? I think that I will try a repeating
> image map texture on the plane. With the image map split into night/day/night. 
You might try a 'splicing' border with fragments of the images 
interleaved to produce the transition.

Or...rather than a graded transition, just some sort of framing.  I 
think the blunt edges abutted is part of the problem.

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 12:44:19 -0400, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:

>You might try a 'splicing' border with fragments of the images 
>interleaved to produce the transition.
>
>Or...rather than a graded transition, just some sort of framing.  I 
>think the blunt edges abutted is part of the problem.

I'm not too sure what you mean, Jim.
I'm working on the sky first, rewriting the code for the stars. {I'm using a
modeller and having 3000 stars as 3000 objects was slowing it down a bit. (Beta
testing and you have to push the limits :)} After getting the day sky to blend
in with the night sky I'll look at the plane.
So how would I splice the images on the floor? I'm thinking along the lines of
your mosaic table and can't imagine how it could be done.
The framing is a good idea as well especially since the North - South faces
don't match up.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
news:eujkf49ophafs4r620i7k2dtqieaqcodlh@4ax.com...

  I tried to reply to your post last night Stephen, but for whatever reason, 
my newsreader, (OE), just wouldn't connect to the povray server. This isn't 
new, every Sunday night, I can't connect for some reason. It seems to be 
doing this for around 2 to 3 hours at a time. Anyone else getting this using 
a newsreader? (The main website groups show ok).

  Anyway, what I wanted to ask is where do you get that buddha model from? I 
want to have a play...  ;)

  I agree that there should be some kind of 'fade-in/fade-out' tranquility 
in your image somewhere. I think that would make it with the concept you 
have, (which I like).


     ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:23:54 +0100, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>  Anyway, what I wanted to ask is where do you get that buddha model from? I 
>want to have a play...  ;)

Just a quick reply before going for something to eat. (I've just driven up to
Glasgow)
I found the Buddha at 
http://www.3dvia.com/
You will have to register and search for Budda. 
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:23:54 +0100, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>
>"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
>news:eujkf49ophafs4r620i7k2dtqieaqcodlh@4ax.com...
>
>  I tried to reply to your post last night Stephen, but for whatever reason, 
>my newsreader, (OE), just wouldn't connect to the povray server. This isn't 
>new, every Sunday night, I can't connect for some reason. It seems to be 
>doing this for around 2 to 3 hours at a time. Anyone else getting this using 
>a newsreader? (The main website groups show ok).
>

I sometimes have that problem as well :(

>  I agree that there should be some kind of 'fade-in/fade-out' tranquility 
>in your image somewhere. I think that would make it with the concept you 
>have, (which I like).
>
I'm working on it but have some slight problems, then I will work on the floor. 
It is just a diversion from the my Tina Chep animation and I don't want to spend
too much time on it.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> schreef in bericht news:48fcbeb9$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
> news:eujkf49ophafs4r620i7k2dtqieaqcodlh@4ax.com...
>
>  I tried to reply to your post last night Stephen, but for whatever 
> reason, my newsreader, (OE), just wouldn't connect to the povray server. 
> This isn't new, every Sunday night, I can't connect for some reason. It 
> seems to be doing this for around 2 to 3 hours at a time. Anyone else 
> getting this using a newsreader? (The main website groups show ok).

Yes, happens once in a while, whatever the day or the hour by the way.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
news:c1qpf45ih4fjo7g2oncj3rcngfpgddba9q@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:23:54 +0100, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>
>>  Anyway, what I wanted to ask is where do you get that buddha model from? 
>> I
>>want to have a play...  ;)
>
> Just a quick reply before going for something to eat. (I've just driven up 
> to
> Glasgow)
> I found the Buddha at
> http://www.3dvia.com/
> You will have to register and search for Budda.

     Ah, ok, thanks. You drove up to Glasgow??  0.0

       ~Steve~


> -- 
>
> Regards
>     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet> wrote in message 
news:48fd85dc$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> schreef in bericht news:48fcbeb9$1@news.povray.org...
>>
>> "Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
>> news:eujkf49ophafs4r620i7k2dtqieaqcodlh@4ax.com...
>>
>>  I tried to reply to your post last night Stephen, but for whatever 
>> reason, my newsreader, (OE), just wouldn't connect to the povray server. 
>> This isn't new, every Sunday night, I can't connect for some reason. It 
>> seems to be doing this for around 2 to 3 hours at a time. Anyone else 
>> getting this using a newsreader? (The main website groups show ok).
>
> Yes, happens once in a while, whatever the day or the hour by the way.

     Hmm, well at least it's not just me. One of life's mysteries, Thomas! 
:)

       ~Steve~


>
> Thomas
>
>

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:21:04 +0100, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>
>     Ah, ok, thanks. 

My pleasure ;)

>You drove up to Glasgow??  0.0

And I'm driving back to London Thursday evening :(

8 hrs listening to R4 :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
news:5qvrf4dp61ktd224nqq1gleutaf8851jrf@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:21:04 +0100, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>
>>
>>     Ah, ok, thanks.
>
> My pleasure ;)
>
>>You drove up to Glasgow??  0.0
>
> And I'm driving back to London Thursday evening :(

     Phew! I don't envy you my friend.


>
> 8 hrs listening to R4 :)

    LOL!!  Don't fall asleep. :o)


        ~Steve~


> -- 
>
> Regards
>     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:24:41 +0100, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>
>"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
>news:5qvrf4dp61ktd224nqq1gleutaf8851jrf@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:21:04 +0100, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>     Ah, ok, thanks.
>>
>> My pleasure ;)
>>
>>>You drove up to Glasgow??  0.0
>>
>> And I'm driving back to London Thursday evening :(
>
>     Phew! I don't envy you my friend.
>

I prefer it to flying and I've hired a good car.

>>
>> 8 hrs listening to R4 :)
>
>    LOL!!  Don't fall asleep. :o)
>

I can always switch to Handel's Concerto Grosso :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:06:22 +0100, Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:

I've managed to create a fade but it looks a bit cylindrical to my eyes. The
floor still needs a bit of work.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'Buddha03c2_0000.jpg' (60 KB)

Preview of image 'Buddha03c2_0000.jpg'

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht 
news:d4ttf4lv3r8c6g4pu5kcv17guu773nmtc2@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:06:22 +0100, Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>
> I've managed to create a fade but it looks a bit cylindrical to my eyes. 
> The
> floor still needs a bit of work.
>

Better!
Could you do a fade that would take up, say, 1/4 of each image?

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht 
news:d4ttf4lv3r8c6g4pu5kcv17guu773nmtc2@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:06:22 +0100, Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>
> I've managed to create a fade but it looks a bit cylindrical to my eyes. 
> The
> floor still needs a bit of work.
>

Better!
Could you do a fade that would take up, say, 1/4 of each image?

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht 
news:d4ttf4lv3r8c6g4pu5kcv17guu773nmtc2@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:06:22 +0100, Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>
> I've managed to create a fade but it looks a bit cylindrical to my eyes. 
> The
> floor still needs a bit of work.
>

Better!
Could you do a fade that would take up, say, 1/4 of each image?

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht 
news:d4ttf4lv3r8c6g4pu5kcv17guu773nmtc2@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:06:22 +0100, Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>
> I've managed to create a fade but it looks a bit cylindrical to my eyes. 
> The
> floor still needs a bit of work.
>

Better!
Could you do a fade that would take up, say, 1/4 of each image?

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht 
news:d4ttf4lv3r8c6g4pu5kcv17guu773nmtc2@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:06:22 +0100, Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>
> I've managed to create a fade but it looks a bit cylindrical to my eyes. 
> The
> floor still needs a bit of work.
>

Better!
Could you do a fade that would take up, say, 1/4 of each image?

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht 
news:d4ttf4lv3r8c6g4pu5kcv17guu773nmtc2@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:06:22 +0100, Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>
> I've managed to create a fade but it looks a bit cylindrical to my eyes. 
> The
> floor still needs a bit of work.
>

Better!
Could you do a fade that would take up, say, 1/4 of each image?

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'Buddha03c2_0000.jpg' (1 KB) Download 'Buddha03c5_.jpg' (310 KB)

Preview of image 'Buddha03c5_.jpg'

The green status looks much more 3D to me than the gold one in this 
setting. The scene really looks kind of ... flat, overall.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht 
news:g2lvf45guv6d9tqfaareesf0nsf2j9devv@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:56:51 +0200, "Thomas de Groot" 
> <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Could you do a fade that would take up, say, 1/4 of each image?
>>
> That was more difficult than I thought it would be. My maths gland has 
> gone on
> strike + a problem with Beta 29 and me trying to be clever with r.g.b 
> values in
> reflections.
> -- 

Bravo! as far as the ground is concerned, that looks much better. Could you 
do the same for the background?

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Post a reply to this message

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'Buddha03c5_.jpg' (1 KB) Download 'Buddha03d2_.jpg' (78 KB)

Preview of image 'Buddha03d2_.jpg'

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht 
news:8og0g4l726spv0mdl59nmcg4esj0rfbg92@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 09:25:12 +0200, "Thomas de Groot" 
> <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Bravo! as far as the ground is concerned, that looks much better. Could 
>>you
>>do the same for the background?
>
> Yes Sir :-)

hmm hmm hmm.... Still a little boundary line visible on the day side, but 
that's the idea indeed!!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 12:44:19 -0400, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
> 
> 
>>You might try a 'splicing' border with fragments of the images 
>>interleaved to produce the transition.
>>
>>Or...rather than a graded transition, just some sort of framing.  I 
>>think the blunt edges abutted is part of the problem.
> 
> 
> I'm not too sure what you mean, Jim.
> I'm working on the sky first, rewriting the code for the stars. {I'm using a
> modeller and having 3000 stars as 3000 objects was slowing it down a bit. (Beta
> testing and you have to push the limits :)} After getting the day sky to blend
> in with the night sky I'll look at the plane.
> So how would I splice the images on the floor? I'm thinking along the lines of
> your mosaic table and can't imagine how it could be done.
> The framing is a good idea as well especially since the North - South faces
> don't match up.

Sorry I never got back to this, finally forced myself to take a break 
from work and relax a bit.  I guess I didn't describe what I meant very 
well.

Here are two examples of what I meant for posible transitions that are 
"spliced" as I tried to describe it rather than a smooth fade. (I think 
the smooth fade that Thomas suggested and you have managed so far is 
quite effective, btw.) Each of these examples is arrived at differently 
and probably rather crudely but my larger point is that there is not a 
single answer to either look or method to what I meant.  I am just 
popping an image_map in to stand for  the night v day backgrounds you 
have.  If you are rendering them directly of course, each of the methods 
I use here could be resolved into a pigment_pattern which could then be 
used with MegaPOV's camera pigment.

I'll put the SDL on p.b.scene-files

As for the floor I'll noodle on it a bit further

-Jim

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download '1.png' (334 KB) Download '2.png' (307 KB)

Preview of image '1.png'

Preview of image '2.png'

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:
> Here are two examples of what I meant for posible transitions that are 

Hmmm... Nice. I like the first one better. Perhaps a more symbolic 
splice tho?  Little 8-fold wheels or Tao-shape spirals?

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

Post a reply to this message

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download '2.png' (1 KB) Download 'f2.jpg' (74 KB) Download 'f1.jpg' (136 KB) Download 'f3.jpg' (108 KB)

Preview of image 'f2.jpg'

Preview of image 'f1.jpg'

Preview of image 'f3.jpg'

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter nous illumina en ce 2008-11-01 01:45 -->
> Stephen wrote:
>> On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 12:44:19 -0400, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> You might try a 'splicing' border with fragments of the images 
>>> interleaved to produce the transition.
>>>
>>> Or...rather than a graded transition, just some sort of framing.  I 
>>> think the blunt edges abutted is part of the problem.
>>
>>
>> I'm not too sure what you mean, Jim.
>> I'm working on the sky first, rewriting the code for the stars. {I'm 
>> using a
>> modeller and having 3000 stars as 3000 objects was slowing it down a 
>> bit. (Beta
>> testing and you have to push the limits :)} After getting the day sky 
>> to blend
>> in with the night sky I'll look at the plane.
>> So how would I splice the images on the floor? I'm thinking along the 
>> lines of
>> your mosaic table and can't imagine how it could be done.
>> The framing is a good idea as well especially since the North - South 
>> faces
>> don't match up.
> 
> Sorry I never got back to this, finally forced myself to take a break 
> from work and relax a bit.  I guess I didn't describe what I meant very 
> well.
> 
> Here are two examples of what I meant for posible transitions that are 
> "spliced" as I tried to describe it rather than a smooth fade. (I think 
> the smooth fade that Thomas suggested and you have managed so far is 
> quite effective, btw.) Each of these examples is arrived at differently 
> and probably rather crudely but my larger point is that there is not a 
> single answer to either look or method to what I meant.  I am just 
> popping an image_map in to stand for  the night v day backgrounds you 
> have.  If you are rendering them directly of course, each of the methods 
> I use here could be resolved into a pigment_pattern which could then be 
> used with MegaPOV's camera pigment.
> 
> I'll put the SDL on p.b.scene-files
> 
> As for the floor I'll noodle on it a bit further
> 
> -Jim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
I prefer the top one. The bottom one looks to "geometric"...

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Make yourself a better person and know who you are before you try and know 
someone else and expect them to know you.

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> Just a doodle while thinking about changing an avatar.
>
>  Does anyone have any suggestions or comments?
> --
>
> Regards
>      Stephen

Nice !

Would youo mind sharing where you got / or the source code of the budda?

Post a reply to this message

On Thu,  6 Nov 2008 11:50:27 EST, "Woody" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>> Just a doodle while thinking about changing an avatar.
>>
>>  Does anyone have any suggestions or comments?
>> --
>>
>> Regards
>>      Stephen
>
>Nice !
>
>Would youo mind sharing where you got / or the source code of the budda?
>

Sorry for the delay
http://www.3dvia.com/

Search for budda
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> On Thu,  6 Nov 2008 11:50:27 EST, "Woody" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> >Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> >> Just a doodle while thinking about changing an avatar.
> >>
> >>  Does anyone have any suggestions or comments?
> >> --
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>      Stephen
> >
> >Nice !
> >
> >Would youo mind sharing where you got / or the source code of the budda?
> >
>
> Sorry for the delay
> http://www.3dvia.com/
>
> Search for budda
> --
>
> Regards
>      Stephen


How were you able to convert from the 3dxml format?

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 11:55:04 EST, "Woody" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>> >Would youo mind sharing where you got / or the source code of the budda?
>> >
>>
>> Sorry for the delay
>> http://www.3dvia.com/
>>
>> Search for budda
>> --
>>
>> Regards
>>      Stephen
>
>
>How were you able to convert from the 3dxml format?

I didn't. I downloaded the 3ds format ;)

http://www.3dvia.com/MichelAngelo/models/F516D9EBFDCFE1F3

Click "download" and select.

Original 3ds File (1.17 MB)

Then register to download.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 11:55:04 EST, "Woody" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> >> >Would youo mind sharing where you got / or the source code of the budda?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Sorry for the delay
> >> http://www.3dvia.com/
> >>
> >> Search for budda
> >> --
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>      Stephen
> >
> >
> >How were you able to convert from the 3dxml format?
>
> I didn't. I downloaded the 3ds format ;)
>
> http://www.3dvia.com/MichelAngelo/models/F516D9EBFDCFE1F3
>
> Click "download" and select.
>
> Original 3ds File (1.17 MB)
>
> Then register to download.
> --
>
> Regards
>      Stephen


Forgive my ignorance, what program did you use to convert from 3ds. Is it
free/open source I currently only know of one shareware program, and I am not
particularly keen on using it since it goes against my hippie philosophy of
promoting open source.

Post a reply to this message

"Woody" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht 
news:web.4975c074390cc5e3aefa83390@news.povray.org...

> Forgive my ignorance, what program did you use to convert from 3ds. Is it
> free/open source I currently only know of one shareware program, and I am 
> not
> particularly keen on using it since it goes against my hippie philosophy 
> of
> promoting open source.
>
>

Poseray does the job  :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Woody" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Forgive my ignorance, what program did you use to convert from 3ds. Is it
> free/open source I currently only know of one shareware program, and I am not
> particularly keen on using it since it goes against my hippie philosophy of
> promoting open source.

I guess you're not running Windows; otherwise I could recommend - without
thinking - two free tools that do both 3ds import and POV export: Wings 3D and
PoseRay.

For Linux, you may want to try the Wine / PoseRay combo. PoseRay claims to be
running perfectly fine on Wine. Cheers!

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 07:15:48 EST, "Woody" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>
>Forgive my ignorance, what program did you use to convert from 3ds. Is it
>free/open source I currently only know of one shareware program, and I am not
>particularly keen on using it since it goes against my hippie philosophy of
>promoting open source.

That is three of us voting for PoseRay, which can be run under Wine, if you are
using Linux. There is no mention of a licence that I can find.

http://mysite.verizon.net/sfg0000/

And this old hippy wants to know what's wrong with "open source"?
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> And this old hippy wants to know what's wrong with "open source"?

I don't know whether this is actually the question you were intending to ask (as
of now there wasn't any mention of anything being wrong with open source, just
with shareware) - but I as a professional software developer could make some
points.

Most importantly, the "aggressive" type of open source, as pushed by the FSF and
their GPL, if it succeeded, would (put a little bit to extreme to emphasize the
point) deprive individuals of their freedom to devote their whole life to
developing software, and share it with others in exchange for pizza, computer
hardware, and a roof above the head.

Sure, the FSF promotes sharing one's software in exchange for... what? Other
free software? Well, I can't eat that, plug my keyboard into it, or take
shelter from the rain in it.

The FSF's "free software" Utopia is based on the assumption that software is
developed as a pastime, or as a "spin-off" of some other occupation. While this
may be commonplace in the academic world, some people would want to opt for a
more drastically software-development-centered lifestyle, and they need to eat.
Anything wrong with shareware here? Don't think so.


But I guess this may get us off-topic a bit...

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:57:51 EST, "clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>> And this old hippy wants to know what's wrong with "open source"?
>
>I don't know whether this is actually the question you were intending to ask (as
>of now there wasn't any mention of anything being wrong with open source, just
>with shareware) - but I as a professional software developer could make some
>points.
>
[snip]

I understand that Christoph. But I would have thought that the "hippie
philosophy" would endorse "open source". Free love and all that.

>But I guess this may get us off-topic a bit...

True, but that has never stopped me ;)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Woody escreveu:
> Forgive my ignorance, what program did you use to convert from 3ds. Is it
> free/open source I currently only know of one shareware program, and I am not
> particularly keen on using it since it goes against my hippie philosophy of
> promoting open source.

Blender does the job as well as Wings 3D, both run natively on Linux.

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht 
news:crmbn457io812781v0vht4glfgca8hcdda@4ax.com...
> I understand that Christoph. But I would have thought that the "hippie
> philosophy" would endorse "open source". Free love and all that.

Indeed... Same question here. I use OpenOffice.org to (almost) full 
satisfaction, and without feeling guilty towards MS... ;-)

>>But I guess this may get us off-topic a bit...
>
> True, but that has never stopped me ;)

Neither does it me...

Post a reply to this message

clipka escreveu:
> with shareware) - but I as a professional software developer could make some
> points.

I'm a professional software developer too -- though most probably not 
talking as close to the metal as some of you guys here seem to -- and I 
believe I can make a few points as well. ;)

> Most importantly, the "aggressive" type of open source, as pushed by the FSF and
> their GPL, if it succeeded, would (put a little bit to extreme to emphasize the
> point) deprive individuals of their freedom to devote their whole life to
> developing software, and share it with others in exchange for pizza, computer
> hardware, and a roof above the head.

I don't think so.  Most enterprises either build their private systems 
in house or pay a third party to build it and even hand over the source 
code anyway.  Private enterprise commercial systems are hardly portable 
or fittable to other organization needs so there's really no point in 
open-sourcing a one-fits-all kind of system and even if there was they 
would still hire software developers to customize it.

I see open-source primarily as a great way of diminishing production 
costs by sharing such cost of development and maintanence with other 
interested parties:  everyone benefit from it and the more interested 
parties, the better.  It's a very good development model geared 
primarily for general purpose infrastructure software, but not so much 
for user applications which are meant to be specific.

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Indeed... Same question here. I use OpenOffice.org to (almost) full 
> satisfaction, and without feeling guilty towards MS... ;-)

It usually confuses matters to try to analyze "real" open source software 
(like the Linux kernel) with software that was created and given away as a 
competitive advantage to the creators. Some "open" software was originally 
created by a hardware company who wanted good software for their hardware 
that would compete with the software available for other hardware. Giving 
away the software made their hardware (where they made their actual money) 
more attractive.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message

clipka escribió:
> "Woody" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>> Forgive my ignorance, what program did you use to convert from 3ds. Is it
>> free/open source I currently only know of one shareware program, and I am not
>> particularly keen on using it since it goes against my hippie philosophy of
>> promoting open source.
> 
> I guess you're not running Windows; otherwise I could recommend - without
> thinking - two free tools that do both 3ds import and POV export: Wings 3D and
> PoseRay.
> 
> For Linux, you may want to try the Wine / PoseRay combo. PoseRay claims to be
> running perfectly fine on Wine. Cheers!
> 
> 

   Wings3d works nicely on Linux too... and for me the current POV exporter 
does a good job on the geometry, although it could be more "edit-friendly".

--
Jaime

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 16:52:03 +0100, "Thomas de Groot"
<tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote:

>
>"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht 
>news:crmbn457io812781v0vht4glfgca8hcdda@4ax.com...
>> I understand that Christoph. But I would have thought that the "hippie
>> philosophy" would endorse "open source". Free love and all that.
>
>Indeed... Same question here. I use OpenOffice.org to (almost) full 
>satisfaction, and without feeling guilty towards MS... ;-)
>

I don't feel guilty any more I'm even cured of distaste for "Big Blue".

I gave up using OpenOffice.org as I still use M$ at work and my fingers can only
remember so many shortcuts ;)

>>>But I guess this may get us off-topic a bit...
>>
>> True, but that has never stopped me ;)
>
>Neither does it me... 
>

Well OT gets a bit On Topic at times :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:23:51 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:

>Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> Indeed... Same question here. I use OpenOffice.org to (almost) full 
>> satisfaction, and without feeling guilty towards MS... ;-)
>
>It usually confuses matters to try to analyze "real" open source software 
>(like the Linux kernel) with software that was created and given away as a 
>competitive advantage to the creators. Some "open" software was originally 
>created by a hardware company who wanted good software for their hardware 
>that would compete with the software available for other hardware. Giving 
>away the software made their hardware (where they made their actual money) 
>more attractive.

Some capitalists are sneaky :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I don't think so.  Most enterprises either build their private systems
> in house or pay a third party to build it and even hand over the source
> code anyway.  Private enterprise commercial systems are hardly portable
> or fittable to other organization needs so there's really no point in
> open-sourcing a one-fits-all kind of system and even if there was they
> would still hire software developers to customize it.

Okay, we're talking about two different worlds here (yet again): You're thinking
of custom-tailored corporate inhouse software; I'm thinking of stuff that is
typically distributed as shareware (say, for example, tools like UltraEdit).

Then again, there's companies like the one I currently happen to work for,
trying to do stuff with embedded Linux; it's an awful hassle, as we found out.
How can you build a Linux box that will be built into a car?

It basically requires you to (1) use GPL'ed software, because you can't write
*all* the stuff from scratch, nor can you buy it - there's no true commercial
alternatives out there; because of that it requires you to (2) release *all*
the source code of the final product under the GPL as well, and provide
interested users all necessary tools to - well, let's just call it by name -
basically "hack" the box and flash their own software into it; but at the same
time you must (3) keep the automotive company's confidential information (CAN
bus protocol details and such) secret, *and* make sure that nobody can convert
the car into rolling danger by "hacking" the box.

So it's no surprise the embedded Linux idea has not really reached full speed
yet.

While clearing away the "legal landmines" of software patents, the FSF is laying
their own "legal mines" in the territory gained, with the aggressive GPL'ization
of free software.

An old african proverb says, if elephants (here: big companies and the FSF)
fight, it is the grass (here: small developers) that suffers.


> I see open-source primarily as a great way of diminishing production
> costs by sharing such cost of development and maintanence with other
> interested parties:  everyone benefit from it and the more interested
> parties, the better.  It's a very good development model geared
> primarily for general purpose infrastructure software, but not so much
> for user applications which are meant to be specific.

The problem with it is that the FSF doesn't see it this way; their GPL is geared
towards making *ALL* user applications free. Including, by the way, web
applications custom-tailored for an individual website.

Their agenda leaves absolutely no doubt about it: Their aim is to make *every*
single piece of software "free" and open-sourced. They're just not going full
gear for strategic reasons (read for example their statements about when to use
the LGPL and the GPL to see for yourself).

Honestly, I'd liken this to communism or socialism: The basic ideas might have
been good ones, but they have been bred in academic brains a bit too far from
reality (e.g. too optimistic about the nature of man), then pushed by
enthusiastic masses too far from the academic ideas, to ultimately fail - after
having caused a great mess that will not be so easy to clean up.

Post a reply to this message