 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>POV is a rendering engine, it's meant to output images not cloth
>data, not particle system data, only images.
What about radiosity and photon data? If it can output those, why not cloth?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sander wrote:
> Just a quick interjection: why have you now the "=20" and "=t" bits
> in your mail? html?
Because it's encoded in quoted-printable format, which most newsreaders
understand. This one shouldn't have this problem (but might cause
trouble for others...)
Jerome
--
* Abandon the search for truth, * mailto:ber### [at] iname com
* Settle for a good fantasy. * http://www.enst.fr/~jberger
*********************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tony[B] wrote:
>> POV is a rendering engine, it's meant to output images not cloth
>> data, not particle system data, only images.
>
>
> What about radiosity and photon data? If it can output those, why not cloth?
Because those are internal rendering values that can have no meaning
outside of povray. A cloth simulator (or a particle systems simulator)
can be useful for people using other software. This also means that if
they are implemented as standalone utilities, they'll still work with
pov 4.0 even though it'll be a complete rewrite and that the pov-team
won't have to expend any effort for this (meaning we'll see it sooner
and there'll be less bugs). OTOH I won't expect pov 4.0 to still be able
to read photon/radiosity data saved by former versions...
Jerome
--
* Abandon the search for truth, * mailto:ber### [at] inamecom
* Settle for a good fantasy. * http://www.enst.fr/~jberger
*********************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3AB### [at] inamecom>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=E9r=F4me?= M.
Berger says...
> Sander wrote:
>
> > Just a quick interjection: why have you now the "=20" and "=t" bits
> > in your mail? html?
> Because it's encoded in quoted-printable format, which most newsreaders
> understand. This one shouldn't have this problem (but might cause
> trouble for others...)
>
> Jerome
>
Ahh, I'll have to see whether they have adapted my newsreader to this
format, yet. Thanks.
--
Regards, Sander
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
